£7 F6 
1902 

Copy j 




THE EPHOD: 

ITS FORM AND USE 



BY 

THEODORE CLINTON FOOTE. 



DISSERTATION SUBMITTED TO THE BOARD OF UNIVERSITY STUDIES OF 
THE JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY IN CONFORMITY WITH 
THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF 
DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY. 



Reprinted from the Journal of Biblical Literature, Vol. XXL, Part /., igo2 . 



BALTIMORE. 
1902. 



THE EPHOD: 

ITS FORM AND USE. 



BY 

THEODORE CLINTON FOOTE. 



DISSERTATION SUBMITTED TO THE BOARD OF UNIVERSITY STUDIES OF 
THE JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY IN CONFORMITY WITH 
THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF 
DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY. 



Reprinted from the Journal of Biblical Literature, Vol. XXI., Part I., 1902. 



BALTIMORE. 
1902. 




p. 

The University, 



THE EPHOD 



ITS FORM AND USE. 
1. INTRODUCTION. 

THE popular notion of the Hebrew ephodh is that of a long flow- 
ing garment, and is drawn in part, no doubt, from the descrip- 
tion in Ex. 28 and 39, but also very largely from pictorial Bibles, 
representing a high priest in a long robe, and from sacred prints of 
little Samuel in a neat white tunic not unlike the surplice of a modern 
choir boy. 

Learned commentators have set forth many widely divergent views 
concerning the ephod, which fall roughly into two classes. The first 
class presents a view, based upon Ex. 28 and 39, that the ephod was 
a garment, and never anything else. 1 This is the opinion of all the 
old commentators. St. Jerome, Ep. ad Marcellam, writes : 11 There 
were two kinds of ephods : one, used solely by the high priest, which 
is the kind now generally referred to : the other, of linen, used by 
minor priests and worn also by the Levites and even by laymen, when 
engaged in a sacred rite." 

The same view is emphatically stated by Thenius.- The ephod 
is nowhere (not even in Hos. 3 4 ) anything else than a shoulder gar- 
ment, as is shown also by the fact that all the Versions, in all passages 
where the word occurs ( with the single exception of the unimportant 
Arabic translation of Jud. 8- : ), either put the name itself, or garment, 
mantle and the like. 

1 This view is advanced by ancient writers such as Josephus and Jerome, in 
the Middle Ages by Rashi, and since then by Bertheau, Braunius, Cassell, Dill- 
raann, .Duff, Gesenius-Buhi, Keil, Kohler, Konig, Lotz, Maimonides, McClintock 
and Strong, Meyer, Riehm, J. Robertson, Thenius, and Zeller. 

2 "Die Bucher Samuels" (in the Kgf. exeg. Handb.), 2d ed., Leipzig, 1S64, 
new ed. by Lohr. 



2 



JOURNAL OF BIBLICAL LITERATURE. 



An English view to the same effect is given in a recent book 3 by 
Professor Robertson, of Glasgow ; speaking of Gideon's ephod, he 
says : " Whatever was made, was a thing of magnificence, and implied 
costly surroundings ; but it is not, by all this, proved that ephod 
means an image. It may have been merely a coat of extraordinary 
magnificence, so heavy that it could stand alone, as we say ; it may 
have been placed upon an image ; but it was an ephod, and an 
ephod, so far as the usage of the language tells us, was a coat or 
covering." 

The second class of views concerning the ephod would make it 
in some places an image and in others a garment. 4 The citations 
are given somewhat at length because they are the most authoritative 
and recent critical opinions. 

Benzinger says 5 that Yahweh was very commonly represented by a 
bull, but almost more frequently the idol was what is called an ephod. 
It appears as the proper object of worship in the celebrated sanctua- 
ries of Dan (Jud. 17 and 18), Ophra (Jud. 8 L>7 ), Nob (1 Sa. 21 10 23°). 
Of course it represented Yahweh. About its form we know nothing. 
From the name ephod 1 covering, garment,' it may be concluded that 
it had a kernel of wood, clay, or cheap metal, and over it a mantle 
of gold or silver, often of great value. Its special significance lies in 
this, that it was inseparably connected with the sacred lot. The 
management of the ephod was, therefore, the affair of the priest ; at 
any rate the ephod needed a servant and, as a rule, a house also. It 
was the means whereby one inquired of God. It is remarkable that 
the official garment of the priests is likewise called ephod — more 
exactly ephodh badh, the 'linen ephod,' 1 Sa. 2 18 and elsewhere, to 
distinguish it from the former. It is not a bad idea of Smend's that 
perhaps the image was originally clothed in an ephodh badh ; cf. the 
custom among the old Arabs of putting on garments and swords 
(Wellhausen, Skizzen, III. 99). 6 The expression nose ephodh, as the 
name of the priest, which was afterwards referred to the linen coat, 

3 Early Religion of Israel, Edin. and London, 1892, p. 231. 

4 Variously modified, this view is advanced by Alizon, Benzinger, Budde, De 
Wette, Driver, Eichhorn, Gesenius, Gramberg, Hengstenberg, Kautzsch, Kittel, 
Kuenen, Marti, Maybaum, J. D. Michaelis, Montefiore, Moore, Nowack, Reuss, 
H. Schultz, Smend, W. R. Smith, Stade, Studer, Vatke, and Wellhausen. Duhm 
thinks a 'mask,' Sellin a 'quiver'; cf. below, p. 4. 

5 Hebr'dische Arch'dologie, 1894, p. 382 f. 

6 Wellhausen, I.e., says it is not necessary to suppose that garments and swords 
were put on images; they may have been put on stones or trees. 



FOOTE : THE EPHOD. 



3 



meant originally nothing else than the bearer of the image (i Sa. 14 8 , 
LXX). 7 

Professor Moore, of Harvard, in his Commentary on Judges, New 
York, 1895, p. 379, has the following: "Gideon's ephod . . . was 
clearly an idol of some kind," adding in a footnote, "It would be 
more exact to say, an agalma ; in using the word idol here and below, 
I do not wish to be understood to assume that it was iconic. All that 
can with certainty be gathered from them [the passages where ephod 
occurs in Judges and Samuel] is that it was a portable object which 
was employed or manipulated by the priest in consulting the oracle. 
In the Priests' Law-book, the ephod is a part of the ceremonial dress 
of the high priest, to which the oracle-pouch containing Urim and 
Thummim is attached ; but, while it is probable that the oracle of 
the high priest is a survival of the ancient priestly oracle by the 
ephod, it is impossible to explain the references to the ephod in Judges 
and Samuel by the descriptions in P." More recently, 8 Moore sug- 

7 It may be as well to introduce here some consideration of the ephodh badh, 
which, in the above extract, is supposed to mean ' linen ephod.' The word 13, 
' linen,' has no etymology, although it has been proposed to regard it as an error 
for 13, connected with kad, the Sumerian prototype of the Assyrian kitu, which 
may have meant ' linen.' The most serious objection to the rendering ' linen,' 
however, is found in Ex. 39' 28 (see below, p. 11), where it is stated that the "CJStt 
13, supposed to mean 'linen breeches,' were made of ttftP, a material which may 
mean ' muslin ' or ' linen.' The LXX omits 13, though Theodotion restores it 
transliterated, thus showing that the word was not understood. The Targum 
rendering is the same as that of our English versions. It seems clear that 13 did 
not mean the material of the garment, and was misunderstood by the time the 
Versions were made. Professor Haupt has suggested that the 13 11SK is equiva- 
lent to irepifa/Mci fiopiov, subligaculum membri ; 13, a ' member ' of the body, as 
in Job i8 13& , is identical with 13, a 'part,' cf. pars {virilis). In Ex. 25 13ff - 
I Ki. 8 7 Num. 4 6 , □"'IS means 'poles' (Latin asser) just as 0<x\\6s may be 
connected with pdhis. The 4>a\\6s was originally a piece of fig or olive wood. 
The expression in Ex. 28 42 , 13 ''DSSft, rendered ' linen breeches,' is probably to 
be understood as a 'covering of the nakedness,' i.e. 'kilts' (see Note A). The 
two phrases which follow, viz. : .1111? 11273 niD3b ' to cover the flesh of naked- 
ness,' and IM 1 1171 D^Dfcfc 'they shall reach from the loins even to the 
thighs,' seem to be explanatory glosses. Josephus, Antiquities, iii. 7. 1, calls it 
the 8idfap.a irepl ra aldoia, and Philo irepi^pLa els aidolcov (TK^Trrjv. The mikhnese 
badh,'\{ this interpretation of 13 be correct, will not be 'breeches' (cf. Pesh. 
KftlPlB = irepLfa/uLa), but like the Scotch kilt, a very short skirt such as is 
seen in representations on Egyptian and Babylonian monuments. (For an 
extended examination of the passages with 13, see Note D.) We must then 
understand ephodh badh to be ephodh partis (virilis). 

8 Cheyne-Black's Encyclopaedia Biblica, vol. ii., New York, 1901. under 
" Ephod." 



4 



JOURNAL OF BIBLICAL LITERATURE. 



gests that the ephod may have been a loincloth ; but adheres to his 
former distinction between the ephod-garment and ephod-idol. 

Professor Marti, of Berne, after discussing the Teraphim, says : 9 
" Not with the same certainty can the origin of the ephod be deter- 
mined. It is certain, however, that it also signifies an image of a 
god. But where we now find it in the O.T. in this sense, it must 
be taken as an image of Yahweh (in Ophra, where Gideon sets it up, 
Jud. 8 26 27 , in Dan, Jud. i8 1Sff -, also before in \f w -, and in Nob, 
i Sa. 21 10 23 6ff> ). It could, therefore, owe its origin only to a subse- 
quent period. This, however, is not probable. Here also it is 
much easier to assume that the old custom of making images of 
gods, as the Teraphim at any rate testifies to, was transferred to 
Yahweh. Therefore we have to discuss here the sacred object called 
the ephod. 

" The name ephod points to the fact that, earlier, these images had 
an overlaying of silver or gold (cf. Jud. 8 27 i7 4f ), and that even 
molten images were found (cf. Ex. 32, 1 Ki. 12 28 )." 

Professor Sellin, of Vienna, 10 speaking of arrows used in giving the 
tordh, says : " Perhaps they were bound together in a bundle (cf. 
1 Sa. 25 s9 ), at any rate carried in or at the ephod. This must have 
been either a covering over the arrows, just as the bow and arrows 
of a warrior were put in a covering (Hab. 3 9 Zech. 9 13 ), or more 
probably a girdle or band on which was carried the quiver with the 
arrows (cf. ""IITtf), and in the course of time the name of the band 
came to signify the entire oracle instrument. never signifies an 

image of a god, no matter how much this is maintained as certain ; 
not even Jud. 8 26f (cf. Konig, Hauptprobleme, p. 62). Rather is 
this signification excluded by Jud. 17"- i8 14 - 20 Hos. 3 4 (cf. also 
Ez. 2 1 27 ) ; molten image, ephod, and teraphim are three separate 
things. Nor is that meaning possible in 1 Sa. 14 18 , for one man did 
not carry the image before his people ; more likely a wagon was 
used. On the other hand, the word in these passages, and also in 
1 Sa. 2 3 6 30 7 can as little signify the simple priestly garment, which, 
precisely to distinguish it from that ephod, was called ephodh badh 
(1 Sa. 2 18 22 18 2 Sa. 6 14 ). Now ephodh is certainly a covering of 
metal or with metal woven into it (Is. 30 22 Ex. 28 s 39 s ) . It seems 
to me to follow as a certainty from 1 Sa. I4 3 - 18 - 41 LXX, 30 7 , that 

9 Die Geschichte der israelitischen Religion, Strassburg, 1897, PP* 2 9 an( * 
101. 

10 Beitr'dge zur israelitischen und judischen Religionsgeschichte, Leipzig, 1897, 
II., p. 115 ff. 



FOOTE : THE EPHOD. 



5 



ephodh has this meaning, and was, therefore, either a covering over 
the Urim, or, better, a band on which the priest carried it." 11 

Professor Kautzsch 12 explains ephod as 'covering,' especially the 
linen shoulder garment of the priest. In the Textbibel it is always 
retained wherever it signifies an image of Yahweh used for oracular 
purposes, overlaid with precious metal or perhaps more correctly a 
shoulder garment. 

Professor Budde says: 13 "It is true that ephod signifies also a 
priestly garment, but only with the addition badh (i Sa. 2 18 ; 2 Sa. 6 14 ; 
1 Chr. 1 5 s7 ). Both significations are later combined in the ephod of 
the high priest in the source P, the shoulder garment into which the 
oracle of the Urim and Thummim was inserted. The old ephod of 
our passage and those referred to, must somehow have represented 
the Deity, and also have been, at a later time, repudiated. The 
gold formed the covering of a kernel of another material ; but 
whether the word ephod is to be derived from a root signifying to 
draw over, cover, according to Is. 30 22 , remains very questionable." 

For convenience of reference, the description of the ephod as 
found in the Priests' Code is here given, being condensed from 
Ex. 28 and 39. 

Ex. 39 s : " Moses made the ephod u of gold, blue, and purple, and 
scarlet, and fine twined linen. They beat the gold into thin sheets 
and cut it into wires, to work it in the blue, in the purple, in the 
scarlet, and in the fine twined linen, the work of the skilled weaver. 
They made shoulder pieces for the ephod, joining together : the ephod 
was joined together at the two ends. The skilfully woven piece that 
was upon it, to gird it on with, was of the same piece and similar 
workmanship. And he made the ornament (breastplate), the work 
of the skilled weaver, like the work of the ephod. The ornament was 
square and double, being a span in length and breadth. They bound 
the ornament by its rings, to the rings of the ephod with a lacing of 
blue to keep it in place on the skilfully woven piece of the ephod that 
it might not be loosed from the ephod." Ex. 28 30 : " Thou shall put 
in the ornament of judgment the Urim and Thummim that they may 
be upon Aaron's heart.'' 1 Ex. 39" : " Moses made the robe of the 

11 Dr. Sellin's view does not exactly fit either of the two classes. 

12 Textbibel des Allen und Neuen Testaments. Erklarung der Fremdworter, 
s.v. " Ephod." 

13 Richter, Freiburg, 1897, P- 68. 

14 The italicized parts, read consecutively, will give as clear an idea of this 
ephod as can be gotten from such a confusing description. 



6 



JOURNAL OF BIBLICAL LITERATURE. 



ephod of woven work, all of blue, and the hole of the robe in the 
middle of it. They made upon the skirts of the robe pomegranates 
of blue, etc." 

It must not be forgotten that the above account, taken from the 
book of Exodus, is several centuries later than the latest pre-exilic 
mention of the ephod ; and to attempt to make it a starting-point 
in an investigation of the ancient ephod, would be like trying to 
understand Gutenberg's first attempt at printing by starting with an 
intricate description of the latest cylinder press. If one is con- 
strained to question the later composition of the Priests' Code, the 
following investigation may help him to see that this is not an arbi- 
trary, but rather an unavoidable, conclusion. 

The graphic account which follows presents the ephod in quite as 
interesting if not so picturesque an aspect, and leads one to inquire 
what the ephod actually was. 

In 2 Sa. 6 14ff - is the story 15 of the bringing up of the Ark from the 
house of Obed-Edom, to the tent 16 made for it at Jerusalem. David 
had not only succeeded Saul on the throne of Israel, but had also 
married his daughter Michal, i Sa. 18 27 , who held a prominent posi- 
tion among his many wives. The procession in which the Ark was 
borne, moved along with pomp and ceremony. David danced before 
the sacred palladium with great enthusiasm, being girded with an 
ephod. All the Israelitish nation assisted in bringing up the Ark of 
Yahweh with shouting and the sound of trumpets. As the Ark 
entered the city the women lined the way. David danced with great 
spirit, and Michal, looking out from the palace, saw him and became 
exceedingly angry. 

The Ark was at length placed in the tent, and David, thoroughly 
exhausted by the long festivity, returned to his palace to greet his 
family. So far overcome by her feelings that she forgot all other 

15 Taken from the document J, probably not later than 850 B.C. 

16 The distinctive name for the Tabernacle is fSv^p, ' dwelling,' though it was 
very commonly described as "Il/ltt 7!"TX, 'Tent of Meeting.' David evidently 
knew nothing of the Tabernacle of the Priests' Code, Ex. 26 and 35, but impro- 
vises a tent for the reception of the Ark. A comparison of 2 Chr. I 4 with I 13 
shows that the 'Tent of Meeting,' IDHE Slfc, was at Gibeon, according to the 
Chronicler, but it is inconceivable that David could have known Of such a 
divinely ordained and venerable Tent, made especially for the Ark, and then 
have improvised another. The consciousness of its unfitness leads David to plan 
the building of a temple. It may be noted, also, in connection with the above 
narrative, that, if our explanation of ephod be correct, David could not have 
known of Ex. 20 26 , forbidding indecent exposure during sacred rites. 



FOOTE : THE EPHOD. 



7 



considerations, Michal went out to meet her royal spouse and said, 
" How glorious was the king of Israel to-day, who uncovered himself 
to-day in the sight of the handmaids of his servants, as one of the 
shameless fellows ! " David said to Michal, " I will dance 17 before 
Yahweh ! Blessed be Yahweh, who chose me in preference to thy 
father and all his kin, to appoint me prince over the people of 
Yahweh ! Therefore I shall play before Yahweh. And even if I 
should uncover myself still more and be contemptible in thine eyes, 
I am sure that the girls you allude to will respect my royal dignity." 18 
The story closes with the statement : " And Michal the daughter of 
Saul never had another child." Orthodox commentators attribute 
the curse of barrenness to divine retribution. It is more natural, 
however, to suppose that David was so disgusted with Michal that 
he ceased visiting her. which was social death to the member of a 
harem. Michal's jealousy would evidently not have been aroused 
if the ephod had been, as is commonly supposed, a long flowing 
garment. It is more likely that David was divested of his clothing, 
as was, on certain occasions {e.g. i Sa. 19 24 ) customary among 
Semitic peoples [see Note B\ and was girded with the ephod, as if 
an apron, or as Professor Haupt has suggested, a loincloth. 

Resume. — The principal views regarding the ephod are as follows : 
(1) It was always a garment worn by a priest ; (2) it was always a 
garment, whether on priest or idol ; (3) it was a garment and also 
an idol ; (4) it was a garment and a quiver or quiver belt. The only 
description given in the O.T. shows that the ephod was something 
depending from the shoulders to the waist, and put on over a long 
robe. But this entirely fails to satisfy the narrative in 2 Sa. 6. 

17 The Received Text is evidently corrupt. After the words ".Z^ the 

LXX has HUT "1121 The phrase bs~w" b" seems like an explanatory 

gloss. For "n 1 ?^", ' I will be vile,' the LXX reads nal a.TroKa\v(pdricro,uai = 
Tl'^r, ' I will uncover myself,' thus making clear an otherwise confused state- 
ment. The Masoretic text shows signs of having been tampered with. , iT?p31 
is an indefinite expression not corresponding to The LXX reading 

'in thine eyes,' for 'in my eyes,' brings out the antithesis which lies 
between Michal's feeling and that of the handmaids. Driver strangely neglects 
the LXX on this passage; cf. Xotes on the Hebrew Text of Samuel, Oxford, 1890, 
p. 210. The Hebrew text restored would then read: "[VOl mm 

{bvrto* b&] mm nv bo ma tik rfopf? inra ba&i t-k* - -rr -rs* mm 
"ttpx miagn d»i x?"- hsuo wm nana mi? Tran rmrn *:zb viprftn 

ls Literally: "And I shall play before Yahweh. And I shall uncover myself 
more than this, and I shall become contemptible in thine eyes, but with the 
handmaids which you spoke of, with them, let me be honored." 



8 



JOURNAL OF BIBLICAL LITERATURE. 



2. WHAT WAS THE EPHOD? 

The ephod is mentioned in seventeen different passages in the 
Old Testament, and the word, with slight variation in form, occurs 
fifty times. In studying the different passages, we must not overlook 
the fact that the O.T. is not a homogeneous whole. If, therefore, 
we wish to ascertain the original idea of the ephod, we must treat 
the passages in chronological order. They cover a period of about 
400 years, approximately from 800 B.C. to 400 B.C., while the actual 
time between Gideon's ephod, Jud. 8 27 , and the latest mention of 
the ephod may have been well on to 1000 years. There was time 
for development \ and it is possible that the post-exilic ephod was 
quite different from that of ancient Israel. 

More than half of all the places where the word ephod occurs 
belong to the priestly sections of Exodus and Leviticus, which are 
known to be not older, in their present shape, than 500 B.C. The 
historical books are not the work of a single writer, but are com- 
posed of several strata. The oldest stratum, or what is called the 
Judaic document, was compiled not later than 800 B.C., and to this 
document we must assign most of the passages from Judges and 
Samuel in which the ephod is mentioned. For convenience of 
reference, the pre-exilic passages are here given. 

(1) jud. 8 27 , wn (D) msftn rron imx aan niB*6 pinj wik torn rj) 

Dttf V"inX ^Klii?", "Gideon made an ephod of it [the gold and raiment], 
and put it in his city Ophra, and all Israel went astray after it there." 
LXX, els e(pco5. Alia exempt, ecpovd. Procopius in Catena Niceph. T. II., 
p. 180: Ecpovd, jxavTetov rj ei'5w\oi>. 'A, eirevdvp-a. V, Feciique ex eo 
Gedeon ephod. Pesh., VHSSW TOI. 

(2) jud. 17 5 , trs-ini tibk t?n wrbx rrs ib nsnz tram (j), "Mkah had 

a private chapel, and he made an ephod and teraphim." LXX, ecpwd /ecu 
6epa<pLV. Syro-Hex., et alia exempt., ecpovd; 'A, ewcap-ida; 2, 'ivbvjia 
leparcKov; 'A, [xopcpw/xara; 2, et'SwXa. V, Qui aediculam quo que in ea 
Deo separavit, et fecit ephod et teraphim, id est, vestem sacerdotalem, et 
idola (O.L. et penates). Pesh., KD'HS mS 12171. 

(3) Jud. i8 u , D"Bnm TIBX rt^KH ffflM BT" *D DnLH'n (J), "Do you know 

that there are, in these houses, an ephod and teraphim?" LXX, e0w5 
(at. ex. ecpovd) ko.1 depacpip. V, Nostis quod in domibus islis sit ephod, et 
teraphim ? Pesh., KD"HB1 KmBI. 

(4) -Jud. i8 1T , D , Binh n«1 nBK.1 nx\ "And the ephod and the teraphim." 

Perhaps a later addition, cf. Moore's Judges, Internat. Com., p. 397, and 
SBOT., Judges, p. 621. 



FOOTE : THE EPHOD. 



9 



(5) Jud. 18 18 , fffiim HK1 11SXH bDS n« inp'l (J), "They took the image, 

the ephod, and the teraphim." LXX, Kal i=\aftov t6 yXvirrbu Kal to 19 
e(pu)8 \_alia, e0ou5] /ecu to depacpiv. V, Tulerunt igitur qui inir aver ant, 
sculptile, ephod, et idola. 

(6) jud. i8 20 , bcsn nxi D"B-inn nxi tibkh nx npn (j), "He took the 

ephod, the teraphim, and the graven image." LXX, to ecpood [alia, 
e<pov8~] /ecu r6 depacpiv Kal rb yXvrrTov. V, et tulit ephod et idola, ac 
sculptile. 

(7) i Sa. 2 18 , nn max nun iih mrr us nx nn^& nxifc^i (e 2 ), "Samuel 

ministered before Yahweh, a child, girded with an ephodh badh." LXX, 
/ecu 'Za/xovr]\ XeLTOvpy&v ivwiriov Kvpiov iraibapLov Trepie^wo-jxtvov ecpovd 
/3a5 \_alia exempt., /3ap 2) ]. 'A, iirev8vp.a e^aipeTov. 2, e0oi/5 XipoOp. 
0, ec/)w5 /3a/o. V< /z^?r, accinctus ephod lineo. Pesh., X2£m KmS. 

(8) I Sa. 2 28 , UB 1 ? USX nXto 1 ? (R D ), 'To bear an ephod before Me." LXX, 

/ecu a'ipeiv e<povd [alia, evdotriov e/xoO], V, et portaret ephod coram me. 

(9) I Sa. 14 3 , TIBK Xt?3 . . . H s nX_ (J), "Ahijah bearing an ephod." LXX, 

aXpwv e(pov8. 'A, <p£pwv eireb~vTriv. V ', portabat ephod. 

(10) i Sa. i4 18f -, rpx w naxn . . . pisx> rnsr-an n a m6 ^xtr naxn 2 * q) 

*"jT, " Saul said to Ahijah, Bring hither the ephod, for he bore the ephod 
at that time among the Israelites. . . . And Saul said, Withdraw thy 
hands." LXX, irpoadyaye to e(pov8 ■ otl avTos 9/pev to ecpovS [alia 
exempt., otl fjv 17 /a/3o>rds tov 6eov~\ ev Ty yp-epa eKecvrj ivuiriov laparfX . . . 
Kal eJ-rre SaouX 7rp6s tov lepea, l/vvdyaye rds %e?pds <xov. V, Applica 
arca7)t Dei . . . et ait Saul ad sacerdotem : Contrahe manum tuam. 

19 Kal to ecpuS probably indicates that mSXH bDS, which means the image of 
the ephod, is a copyist's error, representing an original text "IlBXn fiXI bcEH. 
This text is given in Field's Hexapla, with Dip 1 ? for inpn. 

20 Hieronymi Opp., T. vi., p. 903 : Et vestitus, inquit, erat Samuel ephod bad, 
id est, indumento lineo ; bad enim linum appellatur, unde et BADDIM Una di- 
cuntur. Pro quo Hebraico Latinoque sermone male quidam legunt ephod BAR; 
siquidem bar aut filius appellatur zx&'frumenti manipuhis, aut electus, aut odXos, 
id est, crispus. 

21 The Received Text reads : ,TM t DTlbXfi pX pWUri .THXn IbRI 

♦ bvriw uni xinn Dm nnnxn jinx. For "xn pni$ rwan must be read, with 

LXX, IISXH Ht^an, not only because the Ark was at Kirjath Jearim at the time, 
but because the instrument of divination was not the Ark, but the ephod, which 
v. 3 takes pains to tell us Ahijah had with him. WSJl is the regular expression 
used with the ephod (cf. 23 s 30 T ). As to biT^ . . . DTlbXH ]V\X ITO "2, 
Driver remarks (cf. Notes on Samuel, 1890, p. 84) : is untranslatable, 

1 never having the force of a preposition such as QI7, so as to be capable of being 
a predicate with .TH. We must read, with LXX, X1.TI DV3 TIBXH Kt'3 K1H "3 
It is certainly better to suppose Um to be corrupted from "2^ 
than that U£b has fallen out, leaving U^l. Driver (/or. cil.) objects that "zb 
^Xl'lE^ alone at the end of a clause is bald, and against the usage of Heb. prose. 
It is true that in Joshua and Chronicles nX'Ttl?' 1 U3 is more common, but cf. "2£n 
^Xn'ttT in Josh. 116 2 Sa. io 15 - 19 1 Chr. ig™- 19 , also bUTto* ""SBa in 2 Sa. io ls , and 
bXTiW "JS 1 ?^ in 1 Chr. 19 18 . In two of the places cited blOtr VSb ends the 
first half of the verse, and stands repeatedly at the end of the verse. 



IO 



JOURNAL OF BIBLICAL LITERATURE. 



(11) I Sa. 21 10 , TlK rbti&Z flStb KVl . . . rrt*| snn (E 1 ), "The 

sword of Goliath . . . there it is, wrapped in a mantle, behind the ephod." 
LXX, ii'€L\rjfj.eur] 9jv iv 1/xariLp, 6 adds, ottLgu) ttjs ewojp-Ldos. 22 2, e<pov8. 
'A, evevdufxaTos. V, ^ involutus pallio post ephod. 

(12) i Sa. 22 18 , nn max k$j ^'x nwarn D<:brc Kim crs rwgp (j), "He 

killed that day eighty-five men bearing an ephodh badh." LXX, iravras 
aXpovTas e(pov5 [Alex. \ivov~\. 'A, (pepovras eirevbvp.a e^aiperov. V, viros 
vestitos ephod lineo. 

(13) I Sa. 23 s , IT'S TV TISK, "An ephod went down in his hand." Probably 

a marginal gloss; cf. SBOT., Samuel, p. 70. 

(14) 1 Sa. 23 9 , TEX.n TVP'Sft [rOn nTOtJ nX HEX"! (J), "(David) said to the 

priest, Abiathar, Bring hither the ephod." LXX, irpocrdyaye to ecpovb 
Kvpiov. 'A, eyy lctov to '4v5vp.a (fort. iirevdvp-a). V, Applica ephod. 

(15) i Sa. 30 7 , ran msxn nx x: .wan . . .ittok nx mn nam (j) 

mn niSXn DX, "David said to Abiathar, Please bring me the ephod; 
and Abiathar brought David the ephod." LXX, irpoaayaye to e<pov5; 
'A, ir pocr eyy lctoi> 8rj p.01 to eTrevdvp,a; 2, aTijcrov irpbs p.e tt)v iiroo/xida; 
V, Applica ad ?ne ephod. 

(16) 2 Sa. 6 14 , nn m£X nun mm (J), "David was girded with an ephodh 

badh. 2Z LXX, ivdeSvKihs <tto\t}v e£a\Xov ; 'A, eTrevdv/xa i^aipeTov ; 
2, virobvT-qv (fort. eirevbvT-qv*) \lvovv. Praeterea Montefalconio edidit : 
aXXos e0w5 fivcro-ivov ex 1 Paral. 15 27 , ^/ videtur. V, David erat 
accinctus ephod lineo. Pesh., K^Tl SHIS, 

(17) 1 Ki. 2 26 , ^x mn *:sn <msxn> nx nx'tw ■a n/pax xn n?.n BTav* «i 

will not kill thee now, because thou hast carried the ephod before my 
father David." LXX, /ecu ov davaTwcrco ere on ypas tt]v kl^wtov ttjs 
dca0^K7)S Kvpiov ivwwLov tov waTpos p.ov. V, quia porta sti arcam Domini 
Dei. 

(18) Hos. 3 4 , (740 B.C.) tranm m£X J'Xl . . . bvrW* :Z •OSQ "The Israelites 

shall abide without ephod and teraphim." LXX, ovde lepaTeLas, ovde 

22 Hieronymus, in Epist. LXIV. ad Fabiolam, 15 {Opp. T. I., p. 363) : Sextum 
est vestimentum, quod Hebraica lingua dicitur ephod. LXX, eirufiida, id est 
superhumerale appellant; Aq. eirevdvp.a, nos ephod suo ponimus nomine. 

23 See above, p. 3, note 7. 

24 This passage is to be compared with I Sa. 14 18 , where Ark was evidently 
substituted for ephod after the LXX was made; see note 21, p. 9 above. In this 
passage the LXX represents a text : mm mm pnx TX nX'tM "3, so that if the 
change of m.£X to }HX took place, it was earlier than the LXX, provided the 
LXX has not been altered. There are two arguments for reading T£X, apart 
from any desire to suppress the word ephod (for which see p. 40), and apart from 
its being a natural thing for a scribe to recall the bringing of the Ark to Jeru- 
salem (2 Sa. 6), and write j'HX for n'EX : (1) The expression is unsuitable, for 
no one person ever bore the Ark, and, on the other hand, "I'EX X w'S is the regular 
expression for the priest with the ephod; (2) the context does not suit Ark and 
does suit ephod, for v. 266 refers to the afflictions which Abiathar shared with 
David, which can only refer to the time when David was fleeing before Saul, and 
Abiathar was with him, bearing not the Ark but the ephod, as is evident from 
1 Sa. 23 s and 30 7 . 



FOOTE : THE EPHOD. 



SrjXojv; 'A, Kal clkovovtos 8l ii>8vp.aTos Kal 5id /uLopcpuj/xdroju; 2, 0, otidk 
E0w5, ovde Qepacpiv. 26 V, sine ephod et sine titer aphim ; O.L. neque 
Ephod (simulacrum) et Teraphim (pettates). Pesh., XT1EX Wlh X^Hl 
X&D3 DXD1. 

Two post-exilic passages are appended : 

(19) is. 30 22 , . . . d^iTn ism n3D» nnax nxi ^sc:: ^db ^aic nx ^nxstsi, 

"Thou shalt defile the silver plating of thy images and thy molten gold 
band; thou shalt scatter them." LXX, Kal fiiaveh \_alia exempl. koX 
e£apels] rd et'SwXa ret wepiripyvpup,eva Kal irepiKexpvcrup.€va \e7rrd Troirjaris. 
V, laminas sculptilium . . . vestimentum conjiatilis. 

(20) Ex. 39 27 - 28 , tit 13,1 "EM313 nXI . . . I'tEHTl (P), "They made the 

mikhnese habbadh of fine linen." LXX, Kal rd TrepicrKeXr] [0, /3a5] e/c 
ptcrcrov KeK\ojcrp.^vr]s. V, feminalia quoque linea, byssina. The Targum 
Onkelos has: TW pan Xm 'DMa 27 i"Tl; Samaritan Targum: 
ntttffc n^tt 28 nnxni7. Pesh. has KtfQn Stoma (?'.<?. Trepifa/xa pvaaov). 
Targum Onkelos, in Lev. 6 3 , gives the plural pDipfcl. 

A. THE FORM OF THE EPHOD. 
i. Was it a Garment? 

In the following investigation, the word ephod will refer to that 
which was in use before the Exile ; and the chronological order will 
be observed wherever conducive to practical results. 

As the narrative in 2 Sa. 6 14 has been already referred to, 29 we may 
begin by noting the conclusion to be drawn from it ; namely, that in 
spite of the popular view, the ephod was not a long flowing garment. 
David admits that he had uncovered himself so as to justify Michal's 
censure, had it not been before Yahweh. That he could have un- 
covered himself still more shows that he was not nude, and suggests 
the idea that his brief covering answered the purpose of a loincloth. 
It. is instructive to compare the post-exilic account of this event, in 
1 Chr. 15, and note that the scribe thought it indecorous. Hence 
he " clothed " David with a " long linen robe," 30 omitted I^H 

25 Hieronymus, XXIX. ad Marcellam : In Osee . . . pro sacerdotio et manifes- 
tationibus, in Hebraeo est, sine Ephod et sine Teraphim ; sicut Theod. et Sym. 
transtulerunt. 

26 nXfttSI, instead of DnXfcttl, with the LXX, and in harmony with and 
D"]"ri. For an extended consideration of this passage, see below, p. 16 f. 

27 Cf. Merx, Chrestom. Targum. p. 214: numquam a brevi instruendum. 

28 Kohn, Samar. Studien, Breslau, 1868, p. 59, commenting on 1X21" (in 
Ex. 30 34 ) says : Der Ubersetzer hat n2 offenbar gleich dem arab. bdda, " weiss 
sein " genommen. 

29 See above, p. 6 f. 

30 1 Chr. 15 27 , pa ^Tfcn bsnpft may be an intentional alteration of 
TSXn, Ex. 28 31 . 



I 2 



JOURNAL OF BIBLICAL LITERATURE. 



* girded ' in connection with the ephod, and, apparently to justify 
Michal's contempt, substituted for ID^Dft ' dancing,' the word pITCp 
{ playing,' which is as equivocal 31 in Hebrew as in English. The 
episode with Michal is omitted. 

But the expression in 2 Sa. 6 14 , " girded with an ephodh badh" 
does not imply a garment. David does not wear it, it is hung about 
his loins by a girdle. In the same way a sword is girded upon the 
loins. The original meaning of *l3n, as of Arab, hagara, is ' sur- 
round, enclose,' etc. ; hence ' bind on,' and also ' prevent access to ' ; 
whence mil© ' a girdle,' corresponding to higur, 1 enclosure, lap.' 
Now rH'l3n 32 is the word used in Gen. 3 7 for the fig-leaf covering 
made by Adam and Eve, " they made themselves aprons," ItE^l 
rnin nrb. The margin of the A.V. calls it " a thing to gird on." 
The meaning is evidently a loincloth. The Fr. giron has the mean- 
ing ' lap ' and also a heraldic design of triangular shape, like a primi- 
tive loincloth. 33 But the point is that *"lHn ' gird ' does not imply 
a garment, but a girding, which is associated with the waist and 
loins. 

In fact, the ephod was not a garment at all. By a garment is 
meant something that is worn as clothing ; a towel, e.g., is not a 
garment, though a waiter may carry it on his arm ; nor is a crown, 
although it is said to be worn. By referring to the passages bearing 
on the ephod, it will be seen that twice the ephod is associated 
with teraphim, which proves nothing. Gideon's ephod is " put " 
in his city Ophra. The ephod at Nob was on the wall, or floor, 
with Goliath's sword wrapped in a mantle " behind " it. When 
Abiathar flees to join David, he takes the Nob ephod " in his 
hand." Three times the ephod is " brought " to a person to be 
used in divination. These passages would surely not suggest a gar- 
ment. But there are three other passages, where one might point 
to the English versions as showing conclusively that a garment was 
meant, for in each case the translation is " wearing an ephod." The 

31 Cf. the older form pn2 in Gen. 26 s . Professor Haupt has kindly pointed 
out that Arab, da a/a III. means both la aba and jama a ; ba'ala is a denomina- 
tive verb derived from bd I, 'husband'; cf. waife = 6xeve in note 12. of Haupt's 
paper on " Ecclesiastes " in the Philadelphia Oriental Studies, p. 265; cf. also 
the use of ludere in Hor. Ep. 2, 2, 214; and "play" in Milton, P. L. 9, 1045. 

32 For other instances of the use of "On see Ex. 12 11 Jud. 3 16 I Ki. 20 32 
2 Ki. 4 29 9 1 Prov. 3 1 17 Is. 32 11 Ez. 23 15 etc. 

33 For a photograph of such a loincloth, see Mission Scientifique du Cap Horn, 
Hyades et Deniker (Tome VII.), pi. xii., Paris, 1891. See also p. 42 below, fig. 2. 



FOOTE : THE EPHOD. 



13 



verb that is translated " wearing " is Ktttt ' bear ' ; the Greek and 
Latin have alpw and portare. But there are no instances in classical 
literature of alpw or portare by themselves, meaning to wear as a 
garment ; and Kt273, one of the commonest verbs in the O.T., used 
perhaps a thousand times, never has the meaning ' wear,' except it 
be made for these three places, as in the English versions. In one 
of these places, 1 Sa. 22 18 , St. Jerome, influenced, it may be, by the 
word *D, supposed to mean ' linen,' 34 translates vestitos ephod lineo, 
but there is no reason for it, since the Hebrew and Greek are the 
same. Now it is true that the Century Dictionary says that one 
meaning of wear is ' carry ' ; as, e.g., country people will advise a 
person to wear a potato in the pocket to keep off rheumatism ; but 
the converse does not follow ; carry never means ' wear.' These 
mistranslations of by the English "wear" in the familiar phrase 
" wearing an ephod," together with the anachronism of the Priests' 
Code, are accountable for the notion that the ephod is essentially a 
garment. 35 

2. Was the Ephod an Idol? 

We have now to examine the passages in Judges, 1 Sa. 21 9 , and 
Is. 30 22 , where almost all critical commentators have felt constrained 
to suppose that an idol, image, agalma, or the like, is meant. A 
notable exception is Professor Wilhelm Lotz, of Erlangen, whose 
admirable article 36 on the ephod is apparently unknown to recent 
writers. It is, of course, an easy way of escaping a difficulty to say, 
here the ephod is an idol and here it is a garment, but it is unscien- 
tific. The feeling that it was a makeshift has given rise to many 
curious conjectures, to show, if possible, some connection between 
the idol and the garment ; and so the theory has been evolved that 
the ephod is the covering of the wooden core of an idol, and hence 
a covering, i.e. a garment. Or, working in the other direction, it 
has been thought that the ephod was a priestly garment on an idol, 
and then identified with the idol. Some have grasped eagerly at 

34 Cf. note 7 on p. 3 above. 

35 In German the verb tragen may translate both X"£'3 ' bear ' and ' wear. 
This fact has added to the confusion, since by the expression Ephodtrager no 
distinction is made between ' ephod-wearer ' and ' ephod-bearer.' Since writing 
the above I have noticed that Professor Moore observes that Sw" does not mean 
'wear'; cf. the Internal. Com. on Judges, 1895, P« 3^ r > n °te. 

36 See Realencyklopadie fur prot. Theologie u. Kij'che, third edition, vol. v, 
Leipzig, 1898, under "Ephod." 



JOURNAL OF BIBLICAL LITERATURE. 



the apparent distinction between ephodh and ephodh badh, making 
the former an idol and the latter a garment, thus throwing the diffi- 
culty of unifying the two back upon the Hebrews themselves. But 
the distinction does not hold good. Others, not finding any distinc- 
tion in the Masoretic text, wish to make one, and, as Wellhausen, 
propose to point ^MBK when it means an idol ! 37 But it must first 
be determined when an idol is meant. If the LXX is any criterion 
when transliterations are used, Gideon's and Micah's ephod would 
be TlBK, represented by e<^wS, and the other places T)St$, repre- 
sented by e4>ov8. But those who understand an idol always take it 
so of the ephod at Nob, where the Greek has shoulder piece ; and so 
the distinction is merely due to different translators pointing an 
unknown word, sometimes Ti£8 and sometimes TlSN. In fact, 
they are all forced explanations, arising from giving undue weight 
to minor details, and neglecting the fundamental principle that a 
thing is what it is used for ; and also the ethnological axiom that 
" all worships that contain heathenish elements are traditional, and 
nothing is more foreign to them than the introduction of forms for 
which there is no precedent of usage." 38 If the ephod is an article 
of clothing, then it is a garment and is worn ; if it is to represent 
a deity, then it is an idol and is worshipped ; but if, being neither 
of these, it is connected with sacred lots, then it is a means of con- 
sulting an oracle and is divined with. It is hard to discard the 
notion of the garment-ephod, but it is based solely on mistranslations 
arising from preconceived ideas, and the same is the case with the 
notion that the ephod was an idol. The expressions upon which 
the idea of the idol-ephod is based are the following from Jud. 8 27 , 
113*6 JISH? miK WT\ " Gideon made an ephod of it " (cf. above 
p. 8, No. i). This cannot be forced to mean that all the gold went 
into the ephod — IfilK refers as much to the purple raiment as to 
the gold ornaments — probably but a small fraction became the 
material of the ephod (if, indeed, any of it did !), as this very con- 
densed statement seems to cover much more than is expressed ; for 
instance, the cost of making, the cost of the shrine, etc., lDlX 
mS>2 "and put it in his city Ophra." This verb is usually 

translated ' set up,' as though it had no other meaning ; but it also 
signifies 'put' or ( place/ as in Jud. 6 37 Gideon says, "Behold," TSK 
TZZft, " I will put a fleece of wool on the threshing floor." This. 

37 See Geschichte Israels, Berlin, 1883, p. 95. 

88 Robertson Smith, O. T. in the Jewish Church, 1 88 1, p. 228. 



FOOTE : THE EPHOD. 



15 



verb may mean simply to ' leave ' somewhere, as in Gen. 33 15 , JTPiCK 
S3 " Let me now leave some of the people with thee." One might 
as pertinently argue that the Ark was an idol, because 2 Sa. 6 17 
reads lfiK as to force the expression in the case of the ephod. 39 

DtP nPl^ biCW* b2 Wl, "all Israel went astray after it there." 
Without this comment, it is unlikely that the notion of an idol-ephod 
would ever have been evolved. The verb zandh, in this use, occurs 
eighteen times, and is usually followed by " after " strange gods, gods 
of the heathen, or idols, also " from " the true God. But the phrase 
can also be used of seeking " after a man," and " unto those having 
familiar spirits," Lev. 20 5f , and even " after whatever pleases the 
eyes," Nu. 15 39 . This expression, 40 then, does not always mean an 
idol, and hence it cannot be pressed in this particular instance, to 
imply an idol. On the contrary, one might argue that Jud. 8 33 was 
conclusive evidence that in verse 27 it means something different, 
for " as soon as Gideon was dead," the Israelites again went astray 
after Baalim, implying that when he was alive he had kept them 
from idolatry. But why may not the phrase ^in^ PDt refer to a 
lot-oracle, as may also be the case in Hos. 4 12 (cf. below, p. 36) ? 
This phrase, however, probably represents a later editorial comment ; 
the original narrative, it is agreed, had no criticism to make on 
Gideon's ephod. 41 But a narrative that has been added to is 
likely to be inconsistent. Professor Moore, of Harvard, has sug- 
gested as possible that ephod has supplanted a word like elohim. If 
so, it is easy to account for the condemnatory comment, but it is 
hard to see how ephod could have been substituted and the comment 
allowed to stand, in an age when the ephod was unquestionably 
revered. But the point is that the phrase in question does not prove 
an idol, but may only refer to a popular craze for some unapproved 
use of divination. 

Again, if we pass to Jud. 17 and 18, Micah makes an ephod and 
teraphim. There seems to be a double strand in the narrative, one 

39 Professor Moore, in International Com. Judges, 1895, P- 379> renders 'set 
up,' and makes it a proof along with the next phrase, that the ephod was " clearly 
an idol of some kind." He concludes that this verse, Jud. 8 27 , "imperatively 
requires this interpretation." 

40 For an extended examination of the phrase zandh axre, see my paper in the 
Journal of the American Oriental Society, vol. xxii., pp. 64-69. 

41 In Chronicon Hebr., 1699, p. 407, THPIK in this passage is interpreted to 
mean after him, i.e. after Gideon's death ; when the Israelites took the amiculum 
and used it in idolatry. 



id 



JOURNAL 



OF BIBLICAL 



LITERATURE. 



part of which tells of the making of a rDEttl ^CS, " a graven and 
a molten image," and commentators have tried to establish a parallel 
between them and the ephod and teraphim of the other strand of 
the narrative. Moore, however, ingeniously eliminates the rDEE, 42 
showing that the apparent parallel gives no ground for thinking 
Micah's ephod an image. Canon Driver is certainly right in styling 
Micah's ephod and teraphim "instruments of divination." 43 

Again, in i Sa. 21 10 , where it is said that the sword of Goliath was 
wrapped in a mantle " behind the ephod," it is commonly held to 
mean that the ephod must have stood free from the wall in order to 
have the sword behind it, thus suggesting an idol ; but, as Lotz points 
out (cf. above, p. 13), it is much more likely that the sword was 
a trophy or votive offering, eine Art Weihgeschenk, and was hanging 
from some large peg, upon which, when not in use, the ephod alsc 
was hung. He concludes : To decide from this passage that the 
ephod is a statue standing clear of the wall, an image of Yahweh, is 
incorrect. 

Finally, there are other commentators and scholars from Michaelis 
and Vatke, who is very sure, to Duhm, Smend, Gesenius-Buhl, Marti, 
and Budde, who considers it " very questionable," who hold a theory 7 
that the ephod was a ' covering, garment,' or 1 mask ' of an idol and 
so practically identified with it. The theory that meant origi- 
nally ' to cover' is based on Is. 30 22 (cf. above, p. 11, No. 19), which 
remains to be considered. It reads as follows : fltf <n>fc$!2t2* 

cnn "pm rDD& ma« nxi -pra ^m, "Thou shait 

defile the silver plating of thy images and thy molten gold band ; 
thou shalt scatter them," etc. Comparing the Greek and Latin 
versions, it will be seen that the Latin is simply Hebrew in Latin 
words with an epexegetical rendering of m£K by vestimentum. 
The Greek, however, is a translation, treating the Hebrew idiom 
in the first half as an instance of synecdoche. It can hardly be 
regarded otherwise than as a rhetorical figure, where the silver 
plating and the molten gold band of the D^DE are put for the 
images themselves. To think with Duhm, that the writer is making 
a special point of the outward decoration of the images, is to over- 
look the evident condemnation of idols, not merely their adorning. 
Cast away the and you still have the bDS. It seems unlikely 
that rCEft is parallel with ^*DS, for one would surely expect rCEft, 



42 See Internat. Com. Judges, 1895, P- 375 
« See LOT., 7th ed., 1898, p. 168. 



FOOTE : THE EPHOD. 



and so the English versions have tacitly rendered it. But the chief 
difficulty is that npD£ never means ' molten image,' when, as here, 
it is a genitive. It means a ' casting,' and as a genitive it means 
that the nomen regens is not carved, nor beaten, but cast. fREtf is 
the regular feminine of TlSX, and HDDft rHSK means a ' cast band,' 
just as i"DDft b& is a 'cast calf,' and rDBfc TlS k S 'cast gods.' 
The parallelism is between ^lSiC and fHSK, the ' ornaments ' of the 
Q^DS ; and there is no rule that requires parallel expressions to be 
synonyms in more than one sense. The two things are ornaments ; 
it is not necessary that they should both be coverings, nor of the 
same material. But the ''IBS* was not a covering like a garment, but 
apparently a decoration of an image made with silver leaf, — some- 
thing to make it shine. The aphuddah 44 was like it inasmuch as it 
was an ornament, a gold band, whether as a loincloth or belt it is 
impossible to say ; perhaps it was the ancient ephod. Hence there 
is nothing here on which to base a theory that the ephod was an idol. 

These, then, are the passages that are claimed for an idol-ephod, 
and all of them, as has been shown, are patient of a quite different 
interpretation. It is possible to grant that they may be understood 
of an idol, if this fact were assured beforehand ; but to ground a 
theory on them that is inconsistent with passages better understood, 
is unscientific. 

But if the ephod was not an idol, neither was it a gold covering of 
a wooden core. This distinction belongs more to craftsmen than 
to critics ; for what worshipper in gazing at such an idol (for idol 
it would be) could distinguish between the inner core and the outer 
covering? There is no doubt that wooden kernels were overlaid with 
gold and silver, as in Baruch 6 39 , but they were idols not ephods. 
Etymologically nothing is gained, for the denominative from ephod 
is not 'to cover' but 'to bind.' Another theory has been advanced 
by Duhm, 45 that the ephod was the mask of the idol, which was worn 
by the priest in consulting the oracle. But the girding of the ephod 

44 The derived meaning of FnBK, 'binding,' from *"!l£K (see below, p. 45), is 
confirmed by the lateness of this verse, which, by Duhm (cf. Marti), is placed as 
late even as the second century B.C. It is apparently a misplaced verse, as it does 
not accord with the context, which is improved in point of coherency by omitting 
it. Perhaps it belongs after Is. 3 1 6 , where it harmonizes with the context. The 
interpolation of passages referring to idols is not uncommon in Isaiah, as Professor 
Haupt has pointed out in his reconstruction of Is. 40; see Drugulin's Marksteine, 
Leipzig, 1902; cf. Is. 40 19 - 20 4i 6 - 7 44 9 - 20 460-8. 

45 Das Buck Jesaia, 1892, on 30 22 . 



i8 



JOURNAL OF BIBLICAL LITERATURE. 



was not over the eyes, but about the loins (cf. above, p. 12). Again, 
to escape the idol-ephod, if possible, the theory has been advanced, 
most recently by Marti, that the ephod was a gold or cloth garment 
hung upon an idol. That this was customary among the Hebrews 
is not clear, but for other Semitic peoples, see Baruch 6 s3 . Granting 
the fact, however, how can it be shown that the garment was the 
chief, and the idol the inferior, object in the cult? If people were 
led into idolatry by an idol with a garment on it, it certainly was not 
due to the garment ! This theory starts with the idea that the ephod 
was a garment. It is consistent, but the starting-point is wrong. 
The ephod is an instrument of divination. 

B. THE USE OF THE EPHOD. 

Important as is the light thrown upon an unknown object by its 
context and environment, it is altogether inferior to that which comes 
from a knowledge of its use. In about half the passages cited for 
the ephod there is nothing to suggest a use. To say that the ephod 
had always a religious significance is not to point out a use. To say 
that "bearing an ephod" is almost synonymous with priest is true, 
but it does not tell what the ephod was for. It does, however, enable 
us to draw a reasonable inference, that, as one of the chief duties, 
if not the foremost duty, of a priest 46 in the time of the Judges was 
to obtain divine oracles, so the ephod, his constant companion, was 
used in divination. Some travelling Danites (Jud. i8 5 - 14 ) learn that 
Micah has an ephod and teraphim, and immediately desire to con- 
sult the oracle. On a subsequent migration, they carry off for their 
own use, priest, ephod, and teraphim. David, during his flight from 
Saul, is accompanied by the priest Abiathar ; and on two occasions, 
1 Sa. 23 s 30 7 , it is recorded that he said to the priest T£KH IWHH, 
" Bring me the ephod." 47 Abiathar brought the ephod, and David 

46 In ancient Israel, religious functions were not restricted to a special order 
of men (cf. below, p. 41, n. 103), but every man was free to offer sacrifice or obtain 
oracles by the use of lots. Later the oracular function was restricted to a particu- 
lar order, and ephod-bearer became synonymous with priest. The Hebrew frO, 
priest, is the Arabic kcihin, ' foreteller.' Later still the function of sacrifice was 
taken over to the priests, and the oracular function, at least in theory, was 
restricted to the high priest. For a similar change among the Incas of Peru, see 
Reville, Hibbert Lectures, 1884, p. 230 f. 

47 Bertheau, Das Buck der Richter und Ruth, Leipzig, 1883, p. 163, says: 
"The demand of David, ' Bring the ephod,' means the same as ' Consult Yahweh.' 
But it is David who consults Yahweh. The words are plain enough, and there 



FOOTE : THE EPHOD. 



*9 



inquired of Yahweh. In both instances the answer David receives is 
what one might get by drawing lots. In addition to these passages, 
there is a similar one in i Sa. 14 18 , which will be considered later, 
where Saul says to the priest Ahijah, " Bring the ephod," and appar- 
ently consults the oracle as David did. Now three such indisputable 
instances, where the action has every appearance of being quite 
customary, seem to establish the point that the ephod is directly 
connected with divination. Of course, it is understood that there 
is nothing in any other passage bearing on the ephod to oppose this 
conclusion. One other passage may be noted in this connection. 
In 1 Sa. 28 14 , where Samuel's spirit is brought up to be consulted by 
Saul, as in his lifetime, he comes up, according to a variant of the 
LXX, 43 with an ephod about him. 

To discover what purpose the ephod served in divination, some 
consideration must be given to that subject. By divination is meant, 
foretelling events by means that are directly influenced by supernatural 
power. Among the ancients, the means used were legion ; but among 
the Hebrews hardly more than three kinds were practised, — divina- 
tion by clairvoyance, by dreams, and by lot. The first was the office 
of the seer ; the last, at least in the early days, that of the priest. 
For the purposes of this investigation, it is necessary to consider only 
divination by lot. 49 The point to be determined is how the ephod 
was used in divining by lot. In the performance of this function, 
only two things, apparently, were indispensable : the sacred lots and 
some receptacle in which they were placed. The ephod may have 
been such a receptacle. Its association with *"l^n ' gird ' suggests an 
apron from which the lots were cast, or a bag or pouch girded about 
the loins. To determine which of these the ephod was, it is neces- 
sary to know how lots were used. 

is no suggestion of technical language. The expression is verbally varied in 30", 
where shows that David wanted the ephod to use. If Abiathar had carried 
David's mouchoir (in modern Hebrew "HIC = sndarinm), he might have asked 
for it in the same way (cf. 2 Ki. 4 6 ), with the addition of the suffix of the first 
person." 

4S The reading of this variant, of uncertain origin, is avrip ir peer (3vt epos avafiai- 
vwv, Kal avrbs Trepifiefi\rnj.evos ecpov5. But even supposing the Hebrew "1217 
instead of Ti7)2, the verb HiSI?, which is never used with would go far to 

condemn the reading. 

49 The expression divination by lot is used without regard to the nature of the 
lot, and therefore includes arrows and rods, but does not include dice, which were 
not used as sacred lots (cf. below, p. 25). 



20 



JOURNAL OF BIBLICAL LITERATURE. 



i. The Connection of the Ephod with Divination. 

It has been noted that there was not among the Hebrews that 
diversity in the methods of divination that obtained among the 
Greeks and Romans and also other Semitic peoples. 50 Apart from 
the office of the seer, and ambiguous allusions to the rod and to 
teraphim, the method was always casting lots. There is no doubt 
that in early times as well as much later, the Hebrews constantly 
sought the will of God by lots. In order to use such means, it is 
necessary to have some receptacle in which the lots are placed. 
From the passages already examined, it has been inferred that the 
ephod, whether of gold or cloth, was such a receptacle. It could be 
carried about by the priest or girded upon the loins for use. 

The fact that the ephod was girded upon the loins seems to indi- 
cate that both hands must be free to use it, and suggests the idea 
that lots were drawn out of it. An examination has been made of 
all the statements in regard to the use of lots, to determine whether 
they were drawn or cast ; for this point is essential in forming an 
idea of the shape of the ephod. There is, in fact, but one passage 
which gives any hint as to how the ephod was used — i Sa. 14 18 " 20 , 
which may be assigned to a time prior to 800 B.C. and may be a 
contemporary account. The text is corrupt, but can be restored 
from the Versions (cf. above, p. 9). The previous narrative tells 
how Jonathan and his armor-bearer had put the Philistines to rout, 
causing a great tumult which was noticed by Saul's watchmen at 
Gibeah of Benjamin. Saul at once assembled the people, and found 
that Jonathan and his armor-bearer were missing. Thereupon he 
said to the priest Ahijah, "Bring the ephod." While Saul was speak- 
ing with the priest, the tumult in the Philistine camp burst out anew 
and grew louder and louder. At this point there is a break in the 
narrative, and a blank space in the text (plDS KpDB) fil — 

possibly indicating a lacuna — then Saul said to the priest, "Take 

5:1 See Haupt's " Babylonian Elements in the Levitical Ritual," in vol. xix 
of JBL., p. 56. 

51 This Masoretic note, of course, means only that there was a break in the 
middle of the verse, caused by a defect in the surface written on, or quite possibly 
by illegibility of writing or an erasure, in the archetype from which all subse : 
quent copies of the O.T. are derived (cf. W. R. Smith, 0. T. in Jew. Church, 
2d ed., p. 56; Lagarde, Mittheil., L, 19 ff., cf. Gesenius-Kautzsch, § 3, ci). It 
is the lack of connection with what follows that suggests a lacuna. One would 
expect the priests' answer in the negative, which Saul characteristically refused 
to accept. 



FOOTE : THE EPHOD. 



21 



out thy hands." 52 Thereupon Saul called out 53 to attack; the people 
with him took up the shout and they came to the battle. The inter- 
est in the narrative for this investigation centres in the words of Saul 
to the priest, "Take away" or "withdraw thy hand," or "hands," 
if we adopt the plural of the Greek ; the Hebrew may be read either 
way. These words, as a rule, are interpreted to mean that Saul, 
naturally impatient, told the priest to cease consulting the oracle. 
Thenius, for instance, says, " ' Withdraw thy hand,' i.e. let it be ; we 
will not draw lots." That this exegesis is not satisfactory is shown 
by the emphasis which commentators place upon Saul's natural 
impatience. He would not wait for Samuel on one occasion ; but 
his impatience on this occasion was not so much due to temperament 
as to the bleating of the sheep ! On the other hand, Saul was like 
the men of Athens, in all things too superstitious to take any step 
without using divination, and when by ordinary means he could 
obtain no favorable answer, he must have recourse to witchcraft. 
Other commentators, again, explain the passage by an inference 
drawn from it in this way : if Saul did not wait to consult the oracle, 
it must have been very complicated and long, says Benzinger ; 54 
another commentator quotes Benzinger to the effect that the con- 
sultation of the ephod was a long process, and this is the reason Saul 
did not wait. But if the ephod was not a magical affair, as almost 
all the modern commentators vaguely imply, but merely an apron 
from which the lots were cast, or a pouch into which the priest put 
his hands and drew the lots, the simplest explanation is that Saul 
was in a hurry to attack the Philistines, and said to the priest, " Take 
thy hands out," in order that he might know the decision of the 
oracle. In regard to the answer given by the lot-oracle, it is possible 
that in i Sa. 28 s we should translate CT!? " did not give a favor- 
able answer," instead of " answered him not." The verse will then 
read, "When Saul inquired of Yahweh, Yahweh did not give him 

52 IT ^pX; LXX, Zw&yaye ras x e ?P a s < rov - * s probably written defec- 
tive for "p"T, as "pTr, 'thy ways,' for "V2"H, in Ex. 33 13 Jos. I s Ps. 119 37 ; also 
D3T for Q^T in Ps. 134 2 ; cf. Ges.-Kautzsch, § 91, k. ^CN, 'withdraw,' though 
the ordinary meaning is ' gather '; it is used of Jacob ' drawing ' his feet into bed, 
and also being 'taken' to his people, Gen. 49 33 ; it has the meaning 'to take 
away' in Is. 16 10 57 1 60^ Jer. 48 s3 Hos. 4 3 Joel 2 10 3 15 . 

53 PP'" 5 ! may be read pV'^_ with V, condamavit, and frequently LXX, e^OTjcre. 

54 Heb. Archaologie, p. 408. But he continues quite rightly: "if one had to 
exclude by a series of questions the different possibilities, as this is very clearly 
represented in I Sa. io 20ff ." It was, however, a simple matter when but one 
question was put. 



22 



JOURNAL OF BIBLICAL LITERATURE. 



a favorable answer/ 5 either by dreams, or by Urim, or by Prophets." 
It is evident that Saul tried one method of divination and then 
another, and finally resorted to witchcraft. It seems impossible that 
the use of the sacred lots should give no answer at all, though tradi- 
tion probably allowed but one use of them in a single inquiry. In 
the present case, Saul presumably received a favorable answer. 
This seems a satisfactory glimpse of the ephod in use. and the con- 
clusion drawn from it would be that the ephod was a receptacle into 
which the hands are put to draw the lots. 

But as lots are almost always spoken of as cast, the question arises 
whether in antiquity the custom of drawing lots ever obtained. 
There are ten verbs in Hebrew which are used in connection with 
lots in the O.T. They are : KiS% nb"H, pfe$, \T\\ ^Wl, ^fifi, 
^£3, TbiTHj *W, and !"H\ Seven of them mean 'to cast, throw, 
let fall ' ; while three signify e to come up ' and ' out,' as from a 
shaken receptacle. These verbs seem to show that among the 
ancient Hebrews, at least, lots were not drawn, but cast. Among 
the Romans, also, the common expression is " to cast lots." Cicero, 
however, mentions, as if nothing unusual, that the oracular lots in 
the temple of Fortuna at Praeneste were mingled and drawn by a 
child. Quid igitur in his \sortibus~\ potest esse certi, quae Fortunae 
monitu pueri manu miscentur atqite ducuntur^ On the other hand, 
in the Iliad, III. 316 ff., we read that Hector shakes the lots in a 
helmet with an up and down motion, 57 with averted face to prevent 
any suspicion of partiality, and the lot of Paris quickly leaped forth. 5S 
In the same way the ephod, if it were originally a loincloth as has 
been suggested (cf. above, p. 7), would furnish a lap from which 
the lots could be cast. That the shaking of the lap was to some 
extent a familiar action, is seen from Neh. 5 13 , " I shook out my lap, 
saying, so God shake out ever} 7 man from his house." But in Prov. 16 33 
we read : 

55 Professor Haupt has shown, in BELR., note 47 (see JBL., 1900, I.), that 
T\V2, when indicating the answer to an oracle, technically means the favorable 
answer. 

56 De Divinatione, II. 41, 86. 

57 Professor Gildersleeve kindly suggested to me that the motion was indicated 
by the verb irdXXeiv which is used of Hector dandling his little son. 

58 &s dp e<pav, irdXXev 8e /xeyas KopvdaioXos E/crwp 
bp6b)v' UdpLos 8e doQs eK KXrjpos opovcrev. 

I have to thank Professor Haupt for the additional references : Sophocles, Electra, 
710; Alcman, fragment 63, 11. 24, 400; 15, 191 ; Herod. 3, 128. 



FOOTE : THE EPHOD. 



23 



The lot is cast in the lap, 

But the whole disposing thereof is of the Lord. 

Evidently the verse does not fit the theory of- casting out of 'the lap. 
The word p h H [see Note C], rendered ' lap ' in this verse, is ambigu- 
ous. The English word associated with it is ' bosom,' as also with 
sinus and koXwos. But it is quite misleading to translate |Trl by 
' bosom.' It is true that bosom has a wide range of meanings, but 
the universal significance of the word when used alone is that part 
of the body where the heart is ; and this, it may safely be said, p^il 
never means. It would be impossible for us to say, " My reins are 
consumed within my bosom," and in Job 19 27 pTt evidently refers 
to the abdominal cavity including the liver and intestines, the seat 
of the affections among the ancients, which we associate with the 
heart, and the upper or thoracic cavity of the body. This is respon- 
sible for the confusion in the rendering of p^H, and the same exists 
in regard to sinus and k6\tto^. 1 Bosom' or * heart ' is a legitimate 
translation so long as they are used merely for the abstract idea of 
affection ; but when the ancient seat of the passions had given rise 
to a whole sphere of associations with that part of the body about 
the loins and waist, such a translation as ' bosom ' is entirely mis- 
leading. In sinus and koXttos the original idea seems to be that of 
bulging, protuberance, etc., hence the part of the body containing the 
viscera; then the folds of a garment where it hangs over the girdle; 
whence the lap, a place of concealment, a pocket ; and even a con- 
cave surface, bowl, urn. The etymology of pTT is not clear, but its 
meanings have developed on the same lines. Hence when we read, 
"The lot is cast in the pTf," the reference is not necessarily to the 
lap of a garment, but more likely to a pouch or urn. But this, again, 
does not accord with the verbs which seem to mean ' cast out of,' as 
Hector cast the lot out of the helmet. 

The word that is almost invariably used in general reference to lot 
casting is bTD 1 lot.' The blM is originally a pebble, thus suggest- 
ing that lots were commonly small and round. They may have been 
black and white, or inscribed with some symbol. In Lev. 16 s ' 9 , Aaron 
casts lots for the scape-goat : mbna W fliTK |r01 and 

bnUI yb? Kb? ntr^ I* Instead of rendering with the R.V., 
"Aaron shall cast lots upon the two goats, and the goat upon 
which the lot fell," it is better to read, "Aaron put the lots for the 



24 



JOURNAL OF BIBLICAL LITERATURE. 



two goats into some receptacle, and the goat upon which the lot 
came up," plainly referring to a receptacle answering, perhaps, to 
the helmet of Hector. 

But in the Talmudic tract Yonia (XftV), 4, 1, the whole matter is 
put in a different light. Here we read, "The high priest put his 
hands into the urn and took out two lots ; upon one was written For 
Yahweh, and upon the other was written For Azazef." 39 Evidently 
this was the traditional custom of drawing lots. The word for ' urn,' 
seems to be the late Greek Kakirt], possibly akin to 
koXttos, something hollowed out. The Gemarah explains that the 
*£Dp 1 urn ' was made of wood, but on one occasion a man had 
become renowned by making one of gold ; that the high priest 
snatched the lots out quickly so as not to feel of them ; that the lot 
which was drawn in the right hand was for the goat which was near 
his right side, and it was considered a happy augury when the right 
hand held the lot inscribed miT 1 !?. 

The Talmudic tract Bdbd Bathrd (&OrD fcOD), 122, also has 
an instructive account. Eleazar stands before Joshua, bearing the 
Urim and Thummim and casting lots to divide the land among the 
twelve tribes of Israel. There were two urns used, one containing 
twelve lots, each with the name of a tribe written on it ; the other 
containing twelve apportionments of land. The priest put one hand 
into each urn, and drew in one hand the tribe, and in the other 
hand the portion of Canaan which was to be theirs. In both this 
instance and in the one before mentioned, there was a solemn com- 
muning with the Holy Spirit, who was believed to direct the drawing. 
This drawing of lots suggests the comparison of the method of choos- 
ing officers at Athens, where two urns were used, one for the names 
of the candidates, the other with white and colored beans, the person 
being chosen whose name was drawn simultaneously with a white 
bean. 00 

Of course the Mishnah is not the Old Testament, but it claims in 
Firqe dboth (fTDK ^pIS), I. 1, to record faithfully the ancient oral 
law, and it reaches back as a written authority to the time of the Second 
Temple. Here then we have a clear tradition that the lots were put 
into an urn, or two urns as the occasion demanded, and then drawn. 

tofbo aire nnKi nvb vbv mna in* .mbnu ^ rkum *sbpz 
himb 

60 See Seyffert's 'Did, of Classical Antiquities, under "Officials." The urn 
used was called /cA^pwrpi's; cf. on this subject, KK-qpbw bfxcpav, 'to obtain an oracle 
by lot '; KkdpoLs deoirpoireoov, ' to divine by lot "; cf. Eur. Phcenissce, 852. 



FOOTE : THE EPHOD. 



25 



This oral tradition helps one to understand the account of the allot- 
ment of Canaan as given in Joshua. For instance in Josh. 17 14 we 
find the descendants of Joseph complaining that Joshua had placed 
for them but one portion for an inheritance, whereas they were really 

two tribes, Snni im bin nbm ^ nnru ma. This seems 

to point to the two urns, one for the lots and one for the apportion- 
ments, and the traditional method of drawing lots. We may compare 
here a passage in Acts 8 a , where Peter tells Simon Magus that he has 
neither part (?DPI?) nor lot (b^U?) in the matter. Ovk 
fxepU ovSe KXrjpos iv tw \6yto tovto) G1 — nothing in either urn, may 
have been in the mind of the writer, who was doubtless familiar with 
Jewish customs ; or more likely the expression was idiomatic and 
originated in this custom. Cf. Sap. 2 9 . 

But notwithstanding these undoubted instances ,of drawing lots, 
the fact remains that the verbs used to express the use of lots are 
almost all verbs of casting. To settle the matter, if possible, the 
crucial instance of casting lots for the robe, Ps. 22 19 , was chosen for 
investigation, as being the one most commonly associated with cast- 
ing dice. This suggested Roman usages and the child drawing the 
lot at the Praenestine Oracle. Authorities like Pauly, Smith's Classi- 
cal Antiquities, and Marquardt's Romische Staatsverwaltung have 
accepted the expression " to cast lots " as stating some unexplained 
custom. The latter, however, refers, in a note, to Servius on the 
sEneid, a passage which will shortly be considered. A distinction 
must first be made between the use of sors or KXrjpos ' lot,' and tes- 
serae, tali, Kvfioi and darpdyaXot 1 dice.' These do not enter into 
this investigation, as they are entirely confined to the gaming sphere. 
The common expression with dice is "playing," " using," or "throw- 
ing." In the Roman world the use of dice was prohibited by the 
Lex Titia el Publicia et Cornelia ; the Roman soldiers could not 
have used them under the eyes of a centurion ; and even in Decem- 
ber, during the Saturnalia, they could have had no connection with 
divination. 

To return to the lot, the verbs used with sors are mostly verbs of 
casting like conicere, deicere, mittere, etc., but not the idea of casting 
out of a vessel, but generally in sitellam, which seems to have been 
a vessel with a small mouth, and filled with water, in which the lots 

61 Salkinson-Ginsburg translate : HH t15 nbrBl pbn *f? pK. Delitzsch : 
b-n;i pbn *]b pK. pbn may have denoted originally a smooth pebble (Is. 57 s ) 
used as a lot. pbtl ' to allot' may be denominative; cf. Albert Schultens, quoted 
in Gesenius' Thesaurus. 



26 



JOURNAL OF BIBLICAL LITERATURE. 



were put, but only one of them, as they floated on the top, could 
appear in the small opening. Otherwise the sitetta was used without 
water, lots being drawn from it, as Livy, 25, 3, 16, sitetta lata est, tit 
sortirentur. The expression in sitellam is like the in urnam of 
• Est. 3 7 , missa est sors in urnam, but there is no Hebrew equivalent 
for in urnam. Finally much light is thrown on the subject by a 
passage in the Casina of Plautus, 2, 5, 34, which shows that to speak 
of casting lots did not imply that they were not also drawn at the 
same time. Stalino says " Coniciam sortes in sitellam et sortiar Tibi 
et Chalino." 

The passage in the sEneid, I. 508 f. refers to the assignment of 
the daily tasks by lot : 

Jura dabat legesque viris, operumque laborem 
ptirtibus czqiiabat iustis, ant sorte trahebat. 

Servius notes that Vergil had used the correct expression : Sorte 
trahebat ; proprie locutus est. Trahuntur enim sortes, hoc est, edu- 
cuntur. 

Further investigation showed that drawing lots was probably the 
general method in classical antiquity. Sortior, indeed, denominative 
from sors, and meaning to draw lots, as also KXrjpov/maL, is a fair index 
of the use of sortes, even where it is distinctly stated that the lots 
were cast. " Coniciam sortes in sitellam et so/'tiar" makes the 
matter quite plain. This conclusion taken in connection with the 
Hebrew tradition as found in the Mishnah and O.T. lays it open 
to serious doubt whether a custom of casting a lot out of a vessel ever 
existed. 

But there still remains the query : If lots were drawn in divina- 
tion, why was casting lots the well-nigh universal expression? The 
solution of this difficulty seems to lie in the difference between our 
point of view and that of the ancients in respect to divination. They 
believed in it, as a rule, whether Latins or Greeks, and still more the 
Hebrews. It was an integral part of their religion. The ceremony 
was accompanied with prayer, and it was unquestionably believed 
that the Supreme Wisdom directed which lot should come forth, i.e. 
be drawn. The human element was, as far as possible, eliminated 
from the drawing. The priest communed with God and snatched 
the lots suddenly (see above, p. 24). The impersonal expressions 
are used : the lot came up or came forth (see the verbs, p. 22, above). 
The statement that the lot was drawn by the priest is distinctly 
avoided, as though implying that God did not order it. So the child 



FOOTE : THE EPHOD. 



2 7 



was employed at Praeneste (as, perhaps, little Samuel at Shiloh), as 
being more purely an instrument by whom God made known His 
will. The peasants in Italy still seek for children to draw lots for 
them, and in Germany the orphan children draw in the lotteries. 
Evidently man's part was merely the casting the lots into the urn — 
it was impious to speak of a man drawing them. So Prov. 16 33 seems 
to be the key, when rightly understood, to the whole difficulty. The 
lot is cast in the urn, but the whole disposing thereof is of the Lord. 62 
In drawing, man was an impersonal agent — the lot came out. It 
was man's part to prepare the lots and cast (which may have had 
the sense of mingling) them in some receptacle. Hence the verbs 
used with lots are not those of drawing, but casting. 

We have seen that lots were really drawn in divination. This 
requires a receptacle of a different kind than would be necessary if 
lots were cast out on the ground. A receptacle would be needed 
that concealed the lots from sight and that could be fixed in such a 
way that the hands would be free to use it. An urn set upon a tripod 
would answer the purpose if it were so shaped that the lots could 
not easily be seen. But this end could more easily be attained by 
using a pouch which would have the additional advantage of being 
portable, and when used could be hung at the waist. This seems to 
have been the nature of the ephod. But it is necessary to extend 
this investigation so as to include those objects which are connected 
with divination by lot. 

1. The Teraphim. 

There are two considerations which make it necessary to include 
teraphim. The ephod is associated with teraphim in Jud. 17 and 18, 
and Hos. 3 4 ; and the teraphim are associated with divination 03 in 
Gen. 30 27 ; also in Ezek. 21 26 and Zech. io 2 . 

That the teraphim were of the nature of idols or simulacra, no 
one denies. Laban accuses Jacob of stealing his gods. Micah uses 
the same expression. In 1 Sa. 15 23 teraphim are condemned along 

62 In Prov. i u , the robbers say to the young man, b'SD "cast in 
thy lot among us," i.e. put your name on a lot and cast it with our lots, so that 
you will have the same chance of getting the booty as we have. But the " lot " 
may also be interpreted to mean the portion (cf. Jer. 13 25 ) of the young man — 
put it in with our funds, let us have one purse. See Dr. Philip Schaff's small 
Diet, of the Bible, under " Lots." 

63 See Robertson Smith, O.T. in Jeivish Church, p. 226, 1st ed., and Maybaum, 
Die Entwickelung des altisraelitischen Prophetenthums, 1883, p. 16. 



2S 



JOURNAL OF BIBLICAL LITERATURE. 



with idolatry, and appear in the same connection in 2 Ki. 23 s4 . Va- 
rious theories have been advanced concerning teraphim. Wake, in 
Serpent Worship, p. 47, quite arbitrarily identifies teraphim with 
seraphim and refers it to what he styles " the serpent symbol of the 
Exodus called seraph," Nu. 21 8 9 , Heb., comparing also the serpent 
of the temple of Serapis. Grant Allen, in Evolution of the Idea of 
God, pp. 182 f., explains teraphim as representing the manes and 
lares in the worship of ancestors. Schwally 64 and others have re- 
cently derived teraphim from D^SI ' manes.' But the commonly 
accepted view compares them to the Penates. It is noteworthy that 
penates always occurs in the plural form as does teraphim, and the 
two accounts of the stealing of teraphim may be compared to ^Eneas 
taking the captured penates to Italy {Aln. I. 68). ft5 It is not at all 
improbable that in the life of the Punic leader Hannibal in Corn. 
Nepos {Han. ix.), we are to understand teraphim by the statuas 
aeneas. As to the form of the teraphim, it has been supposed from 

1 Sa. 19 13 that they were of human shape and size, 66 but the inference 
as to the size is not warranted, since the human appearance was eked 
out by a pillow at the head ; all, according to Oriental custom, being 
covered with the bedclothes. Of all the mentions of the teraphim 
this is the only one that might seem to construe teraphim with the 
singular, but it is not certain ; the suffixes supplied in the English 
are omitted in the Hebrew, only one being used, VJYv^'lft, which, 
however, may refer to David (so Budde) or even to the bed, though 
it is masculine gender. 67 The LXX ra KcvoTa^ia 1 monuments of the 
dead,' and Latin statu a 68 in place of the almost invariable idola may 

64 Das Leben nach dem Tode, p. 36. Further references may be found in 
Moore's Judges, Dtternational Com., p. 382, and in M'Clintock and Strong's Encyc. 
of Biblical Lit. 

65 Ethnologically one would err in imagining any connection between these 
early peoples. On this Brinton says, in Religions of Primitive Peoples (p. 8), 
" Professor Buchmann expressed some years ago what I believe to be the correct 
result of modern research in these words : ' It is easy to prove that the striking 
similarity in primitive religious ideas comes not from tradition nor from relation- 
ship or historic connection of early peoples, but from the identity in the mental 
construction of the individual man, wherever he is found.' " 

66 Not so, however, Hitzig; see Commentary on 1 Sam. 19 13 . 

67 Similar irregularity may be seen in several instances, e.g. Ex. 1 1 6 25 19 Jud. 1 1 34 
etc., cf. Ges.-Kautzsch, § 135, 0. See W. Diehl, Das Pronomen pers. suffix um 

2 u. 3 pers. plur. des Hebr. in der alttest. Uberlieferung, Giessen, 1895. See also 
SB OT., Critical Notes on fudges, p. 65 f. 

68 Note that the versions take teraphim as a plural, with the exception of this 
stalua. 



FOOTE : THE EPHOD. 



20 



be attempts to explain away the presence of teraphim in David's 
house, or, it may be that the teraphim, among those who had given 
up idolatry, took the form of ancestral images, associated more or 
less with superstitious veneration, but not idolatry. In the account 
of Rachel's stealing and hiding her father's teraphim (Gen. 31 19 " 35 ), 
it is evident that the word is plural, and that the teraphim were 
tolerably small images, or she could scarcely have carried them 
without Jacob's knowledge or hidden them so that Laban could not 
find them. 

The association of teraphim with divination G9 is so frequent that 
it seems to indicate the principal use to which they were put. That 
they were not used in idolatrous worship is to be inferred from the 
fact that Hosea, who boldly censures idolatry, allows the use of ephod 
and teraphim. 70 But if they were idols, how could they have given 
answers to questions ? It is quite usual for commentators to speak 
of " consulting idols, oracular idols," etc. Now a commentator may 
sometimes give an oracular utterance, but an idol never ! If one 
idol had ever given an oracle, we should never have had the magnifi- 
cent arraignment of idols in Deutero-Is. 4i 21ff -: "Declare to us what 
will happen in the future that we may know that ye are gods : yea, 
do good, or do evil, do something, that we may all see it ! Behold 
ye are of no account and your work is nothing at all ! " — yet many 
commentators, who will not allow any supernatural occurrence to 
pass without advancing a natural explanation, are quite prone to 
imply, and base arguments on the conclusion that the idols in some 
mysterious way gave oracles. Rychlak, e.g , in Osee, says that error 
would be avoided, si de manifestationibus idolontm, quae et consule- 
bantur et aliquando c onsulentibus responsa da bunt, in- 
telligamus. Again, referring specifically to the older passages which 
mention the ephod, two of which, 1 Sa. 23° and 30 7 , represent the 
ephod as giving oracles, Maybaum says, 71 All those passages through- 
out give the impression that by ephod is meant a real Yahweh image. 
Now, either an image can give an oracle, or the supposition is 

69 See an article by Farrer in Kitto's Cyclopedia of Biblical Lit., Vol. III., 
p. 986. 

70 In this passage, Hos. 3 4 , the prophet says of his unfaithful wife that she 
must abide with him many days in faithfulness, but without a wife's privileges; 
so must Israel abide for a period of purification " without king and without 
prince, and without sacrifice and without maccebdh, and without ephddh and 
teraphim.'''' Note that ephod and teraphim are more closely joined than the 
other couples. 

71 Die Entwickehmg des altisrael. Prophetentums, 1883, p. 26. 



JOURNAL OF BIBLICAL LITERATURE. 



untenable. 72 It may be argued that the users of them believed that 
they gave oracles. They may easily have thought that idols heard 
their prayers and influenced their destinies, but it is not credible that 
they believed that any idol (apart from priest-jugglery) ever answered 
such a question as this, " If I pursue this troop, shall I overtake 
them?" i Sa. 30 17 , but David received the answer "yes." Now it 
may have been that lots were used coram idolo and with some invo- 
cation of the idol. In Cheyne-Black's Encyc. Biblica under " Divina- 
tion," Professor Davies, of Bangor, in considering Ezek. 21 26 , says, 
" We omit the reference to the teraphim because no new point is 
indicated by it ; the king consulted the teraphim [singular], by 
shaking the arrows before it, as was always done also by the heathen 
Arabs." His designating teraphim as singular is quite arbitrary (see 
above, p. 28). By consulting the section on arrows (p. 34, below), 
it will be seen that arrows were not always used before idols. But 
farther on in the article Davies says that possibly the teraphim were 
used as lots. Then why not here in Ezek. 21 26 ? But the idea that 
the Hebrews consulted idols by casting lots before them is pure 
supposition, while the use of lots is not supposition but fact, as has 
been shown in regard to the ephod, and will be shown in regard to 
Urim and Thummim. These were real oracles, not dumb idols. The 
prophets could not say of them, " Behold ye are of no account, and 
your work is nothing at all ! " for great leaders in Israel had relied 
on them and had been victorious. 

But "the teraphim," says the prophet Zechariah (io 2 ), "have 
spoken vanity," nptt? 1TPT D^DIpiT! J1K lim DW1 ^, " and the 
diviners have seen a lie." The LXX in this passage, and in Hos. 3 4 , 
renders teraphim respectively by a.7rocf>0eyy6[xevoi and SrjXoi, terms 
which indicate anything but dumb idols, and in this connection 
should be accorded due weight. In the passage in Hosea, and also 
in Jud. 17 and 18, teraphim are associated with the ephod. Micah 
makes an ephod and teraphim, puts them in a private chapel, secures 
a competent priest, and then travellers stop in and consult the oracle. 
With what is already known of the ephod, viz., that it was a pouch 

72 In the same strain, Nowack (Die Kleinen Propheten, 1897, P- sa Y s : 
T2K in the old time undoubtedly was an idol which was used to give oracles, 
1 Sa. 23 s - 9 30". He adheres to the same view in his Richter und Rath, 1901. 
On the other hand, cf. Meyer (Chronicon Hebrceortim, 1699, p. 468), speaking of 
a theory that teraphim were statues of loved ones : " Mical audivit quasi vocem 
submissam loquentem ad se de rebus futuris . . . quod est impossibile, cum sermo 
non possit fieri nisi per organa a Deo in natura posita." 



FOOTE : THE EPHOD. 



3 1 



to contain the sacred lots, it seems quite likely that the teraphim 
were little images used as lots. We have inferred from Gen. 31 35 , 
the account of Rachel hiding her father's teraphim, that they must 
have been small ; from Hos. 3 4 — the prophecy of Israel's being for 
many days without teraphim (see note 70 on p. 29, above) — that they 
were not condemned as idols, but associated with the ephod. The 
order of occurrence is always ephod and teraphim. The ephod 
itself was independent of the lots, which were called by another 
name. The Urim and Thummim, as we shall see, were such lots ; 
the arrows were lots ; the gordloth were lots ; the teraphim seem to 
have been used as lots also. It is quite natural that an image, looked 
upon with superstitious awe as in some way a supernatural agent, 
should be the common household means of appeal to a wise and 
benevolent Power, albeit but little known. The small size of such 
images will cause no surprise to those who are familiar with the 
innumerable Egyptian images not longer than three or four inches, or 
the miniature idols of the Chinese. In Ezek. 21 26 the king of Babylon 
wishes to have divine guidance as to the route of an expedition. 
To obtain it he uses three means, of which one is consulting the 
teraphim. He looked for real assistance. We are probably to 
understand that he consulted the teraphim as we might speak of 
consulting the dice. We conclude, then, that there is no Hebrew 
authority to prove that teraphim is ever a pluralis extensivus, indicat- 
ing but one image, but there are three passages where it is evidently 
plural, and the others are non-committal, or favor the plural. As 
to size, our preconceived notions formed from the words image and 
idol make it hard to think of the very small kind which, as among 
the Chinese, may have been the common household image. The 
narratives, where they are readily carried or concealed even by a 
woman, certainly strengthen this view. That they were not used in 
idolatrous worship in the time of Hosea (c. 740 b.c.) seems a fair 
inference (cf. above, p. 29), and the connection with the ephod, 
together with the fact that they gave oracles, seems to point to the 
theory advanced, viz., that the teraphim were small images used as 
lots in divination, at a period in all probability earlier than 1000 b.c. 
For elaborate arguments for the identity of teraphim with Urim and 
Thummim, the reader is referred to Spencer's De Legibus ritiialibus 
Hebraeorum, 1732, III. 3, and to Robertson Smith's Old Testament 
in the Jewish Church, 1892, p. 292, n. 1. That the teraphim were 
gradually abandoned seems evident from their later condemnation 
as something classed with idolatry and clung to with like stubborn- 



32 



JOURNAL OF BIBLICAL LITERATURE. 



ness ; cf. i Sa. 15 23 , "For rebellion is as the sin of divination (DDp, 
see below, p. 34) and stubbornness is as iniquity (pN, see below, 
p. 40, n. 100) and teraphim." 73 Apparently a later comment aimed 
at superstitious practices more than at the principle of divination. 
See also 2 Ki. 2$ 2i , where teraphim are classed with, but not as idols. 

2. Urim and Thummim, 

The same reasons which made it necessary to investigate the 
teraphim apply to the Urim and Thummim. Their origin, as in the 
case of ephod and teraphim, is unknown. The earliest document 
of the O.T. which mentions them is the Deuteronomic Blessing, 74 
Deut. 33 s , which has been assigned by Moore 75 to the time of 
Jeroboam II (782-743). The passage in no way helps to an under- 
standing of what the Urim and Thummim were. The account in 
1 Sa. 14 41 and 28 s associates the use of Urim and Thummim with 
Saul. The narrative is probably E, prior to 750 b.c. ; and it is to 
be noted that the use of Urim and Thummim is taken as a customary 
thing, and although the passage in 1 Sa. 14 41 , in the Hebrew, has be- 
come corrupt, it is evidently since the third century B.C., and it shows 
no signs of intentional alteration. The use of Urim and Thummim 76 
in divination in pre-exilic times is seen in 1 Sa. i4 41f ', where Saul 
divines with them to discover who had broken the taboo which he 
had placed upon food. From v. 3 it will be seen that the ephod 77 
was used, and we are to understand that the lots were drawn from 
it. Professor Haupt has rendered the passage as follows : 78 " Saul 
said : O Yahweh, God of Israel, why hast Thou not responded to 

»» n^sn a^snni pKi na aap~nxan h a 

74 TTDn UTVb -pIKl T&n ^bb\ "And of Levi he said, thy Thummim 
and thy Urim be for the man, thy godly one." 

75 Cheyne-Black's Encyclopedia, col. 1090, § 25. 

76 A careful survey of the literature on Urim and Thummim may be found in 
an article so entitled by Muss-Arnolt in the Amer. Journal of Semitic Lit., July, 
1900. 

77 In 1 Sa. 28 s we read that Saul could obtain no oracle, neither by dreams, 
nor by Urim, nor by prophets. nifcbrO m,T TO K^l m.Ta blKP bW\ 
a^X'aja DJ D'H'IKD DJ. Comparing the undoubted use of the ephod by Saul, 
the omission of it here is an indication that it was understood to be used with 
Urim; cf. Driver's article on "Law" in Hastings' Dictionary of the Bible, 1900; 
also Robertson Smith's OT. in the Jewish Ch., 1 881, p. 428, n. 4. 

™ ^a up ax "am -pai? nx jt:u *6 nab > biTter 1 *nbx rm <) bixtr na*n 
(bvrt& -jain imp QKi amx nan bihto^Vfcx mrp ntn p»n h 3a jnsi.Ta 

a\ nan > nan 



FOOTE : THE EPHOD. 



33 



Thy servant this day? If the guilt be in me or in my son Jonathan, 
O Yahweh, God of Israel, give Urim ; but if it should be Thy people 
Israel, give Thummim." 79 With Wellhausen and Schwally, Haupt 
combines D'HIK with *T)K curse, representing the unfavorable an- 
swer, while D^ri means ' blamelessness, acquittal,' and is the favor- 
able answer. 

The general view of the size of Urim and Thummim is gained 
from the description of the jtjPn, a kind of pocket (usually mistrans- 
lated 'breast-plate '), which is given in Exodus and Leviticus. This 
pocket, bearing twelve precious stones, was about twelve inches 
square, fastened permanently to the high priest's breast, with an 
opening to allow the high priest to take out the Urim and Thummim, 
which were kept within. It could scarcely have been used as a 
dice-box, for it could not be removed from the ephod. Here, how- 
ever, we may see a trace of the pre-exilic form of the ephod, — a 
pouch to contain the sacred lots. It is altogether unlikely that Urim 
and Thummim were ever used with the f wTT, as nothing is heard of 
it before the Exile, and after the Return it seems that Urim and 
Thummim could not be used,- 0 or rather, that they no longer existed. 
If they had survived the Captivity, they could doubtless have been 
used. The Babylonian Talmud, Sota, 48, a, states that Urim and 
Thummim were lost at the time of the destruction of the Temple, 
586 b.c. 81 Maimonides, 82 however, speaks of Urim and Thummim 
having existed to complete the garments of the high priest though 
they were not consulted. It seems probable that something was 
made to represent them. 

A good deal has been made by Wellhausen, Benzinger, and 
Thenius-Lohr of the technic of the priest in the use of lots ; but 
the idea has arisen from a misconception of the manner in which 
they were used, and a misunderstanding of 1 Sa. 14 18 and perhaps 
i4 41f , where receiving no answer may have been ascribed to a fault 
of technic. Undoubtedly, if the post-exilic priest had had Urim and 

79 See BELR. in Journal of Biblical Lit., 1900, p. 58, and notes 54-61, and 
cf. "Crit. Notes on Numbers," in SBOT., p. 57, 1. 45. 

80 Cf. Ezra 2 63 , and Bertheau-Ryssel's commentary; also Siegfried ad loc. 

81 ff&ni aniK ibtan DWXin 2*^22 irWfc, " From the destruction of the 
former prophets Urim and Thummim were lost." 

82 Yadh Hachazaqah, Warsaw, 11S1, t!Hpfc3 "hi TO^fl, x. 10 : *?tP ITM fffti 

jnn pbww in i6» ffia nsbtr a'birnb "hs a-srn tarn*, "They made 

in the Second Temple Urim and Thummim, in order to complete the eight 
garments, although they were not consulted by them." 



34 



JOURNAL OF BIBLICAL LITERATURE. 



Thummim, he would have used them ; but not having them, the idea 
may have grown up that they were of the nature of charms. Well- 
hausen, in Skizzen, III., p. 144, in speaking of amulets, says : "Frey- 
tag has compared the Thummim of the high priest, which likewise 
were carried at the neck. The phylacteries and bells on the pallium 
show that one is not justified is repudiating the comparison. How- 
ever, although the later Jews may have regarded Urim and Thummim 
as a charm-ornament of the high priest, they seem to have been 
originally two lots to which, when used for oracular purposes, was 
attributed any alternative you please as signification (see Vatke, 
323)." It is not improbable that the sacred lots had come down 
from heathen times and that they were originally amulets. 83 They 
may have been the sacred, or priestly, lots, while the teraphim were 
the common household lots. Probably they were marked by color, 
or more likely with the words by which they were called, indicating 
one as the favorable, and the other as the unfavorable answer. Be- 
ing lost at the Captivity, and forgotten, the very significance of the 
names was no longer recognized and the Versions render " Lights 
and Perfections." 

3. Arrows and Rods. 

These complete the list of articles used by the Hebrews in divina- 
tion by lot, if, indeed, the arrow is to be distinguished from the rod. 
It is misleading even to speak of the Hebrews in this connection, for 
an undoubted instance of a Hebrew (not a Bedouin) divining with 
arrows is yet to be found. 

In Ezek. 2i 26f , " the king of Babylon stood at the parting of the 
way to use divination (DDp) : he shook the arrows, he consulted the 
teraphim, 84 he inspected the liver. In his right hand is the lot, 
Jerusalem, . . ." Much light is thrown on the use of arrows as lots, 
in a dissertation by Anton Huber. 85 In the game of Meisir, arrows 
were used for lots. They were previously marked with names or 
notches, and then placed in a leathern bag or quiver, and shaken 
under a sheet which was held so as to conceal the arrows from the 
person who shook them. When an arrow was shaken up so as to 
project above the others, it was drawn and handed to another person 

83 Cf. Brinton, Religions of Primitive Peoples, 1897, P- I 4^> on lucky stones. 

84 The idea advanced by Davies, of Bangor (see above, p. 30), that shaking 
the arrows and consulting the teraphim were but one act is not borne out by the 
Hebrew. The methods used are as evidently three as any brief statement could 
make them. 

85 Uber das " Meisir" genannte Spiel der heidnischen Araber, Leipzig, 1883. 



FOOTE : THE EPHOD. 



35 



who gave it to the owner, who won according to the marks on the 
arrow. This gives all the facts necessary for understanding how 
arrows were used. The connection with Ezek. 21 26 is established by 
the word for shaking the arrows, Arab, qalqala, which is the vp7p 
of this passage. The lot in his hand, Jerusalem, was evidently the 
arrow marked Jerusalem to indicate the course of the expedition. 86 
Wellhausen, Skizzen, III., p. 127, comes to the same conclusion, 
based upon St. Jerome quoted by Gesenius, as follows : He consults 
the oracle according to the ritual of his people, putting the arrows 
into a quiver, after first marking them with the names of different 
places, and then shaking them to see what place would be indicated 
by the coming out of an arrow, and what city he should first attack. 
The Greeks call this /^eXo/xavn'a or pa^So/xavua. Wellhausen's con- 
jecture, Skizzen, III., p. 167, quoted by Benzinger, p. 408, n., that 
tordh goes back to the lot-arrow and the verb iTT ' cast ' used of 
lots and of arrows, a ' direction ' being obtained in the first instance 
from the way the arrow pointed when cast is very doubtful, inasmuch 
as it lacks the element of chance which is the essence of divination 
by lot ; for if arrows deviated in any unforeseen way from the direc- 
tion in which they were shot, it would render skill in archery unat- 
tainable. Besides, it is first necessary to show that arrows were ever 
'cast' in divination. They were shaken and drawn. It was this 
superstitious use of chance that caused Mohammed to forbid this 
use of arrows, Koran, Sura V. 4, 92 ■ he implies that Satan is the 
one who directs chances, not God. Contrast with this Prov. 16 33 : 
see above, p. 27. Canon Driver, in his article on " Law," mill, in 
Hastings' Dictionary of the Bible, 1900, seems to adopt Wellhausen's 
conjecture in spite of his warning : Such conjectures always remain 
uncertain and do not deserve too much credit. Wellhausen there- 
upon retracts a conjecture made with as little foundation, that C&ri 
is related to tanuVim ' amulets.' But Driver thinks to brace up the 
theory by the use of rHT in casting lots. There might be some 
ground for it if lots were really cast as he supposes ; but being in 
reality drawn, as were the arrows, there is none. Some commenta- 
tors have entered so heartily into the idea of the Loospfeite that an 
arrow is never shot but it is in divination. So it is with Jonathan and 
David, and so with Joash at Elisha's death-bed. But it is altogether 
unlikely, since an arrow, when shot, is gone. 87 

86 See Haupt's " Babylonian Elements in the Levitical Ritual," JBL. XIX., 
notes 1 1— 13. 

87 Sellin, in Beitrage zar Religionsgesch., 1897, P- IJ 6 ff., is not convincing; 



36 



JOURNAL OF BIBLICAL LITERATURE. 



In regard to the use of the rod, the only reference is Hos. 4 12 , 
)b TIP lSpfcl btiti) " My people consult their staff, and their 

rod makes known to them." From this passage no idea can be 
gained of the method used in divination, except the derivation of 
■?jgO from bbp, 1 shake,' indicating, perhaps, the use of rods in a way 
similar to that of the arrows ; and this is favored by the parallelism 
with which may be used for pPl, ' arrow ' ; cf. 1 Sa. 1 f, " the 
staff ss of his spear." But it is not even certain that it was a lot at 
all. The reference may be to a so-called divining rod which is said 
to shake in the hand and indicate where water is to be found. If 
the use of the rod, however, were similar to that of the arrow as a 
lot, this verse (Hos. 4 12 ), with the use of P1J1 ' to go astray' after 
lot-oracles (see above, p. 15) ought to be compared with Jud. 8 27 , 
where the same expression is used of Gideon's ephod. The rod has 
an extensive use in Hebrew literature as a magician's wand or pedes- 
trian's staff, but the data that prove its use as a lot are wanting. 

2. The Ephod as a Part of the Insignia of Priests. 

With the Captivity the ancient regime of the Hebrews came to an 
end, and the period of Babylonian influence began. In all probability 
many old customs and usages fell into desuetude, never to be revived ; 
many traditions derived from heathen times lapsed, and thereafter 
were only remembered with shame; many ceremonial objects of 
venerable antiquity were lost, and became names to conjure with, 
or were restored under new forms bearing little likeness to the old. 
So it was with the Urim and Thummim, which were never to appear 
again ; and yet the longing for them breaks forth in the Korahite 
psalm (43) of the Second Temple : " O send out Thy Urim and 
Thy Thummim, that they may lead me." 89 

But though Urim and Thummim did not exist after the Captivity 
(see above, p. 33), yet the ptfpf was made, and also the ephod to 
which it was attached; for the Babylonian Talmud, pttHp, 37, a, 
has a tradition of sages coming to a certain heathen Dama, the son 

Ezek. 21 23 , e.g., certainly does not show that the Hebrews used arrows. In Reclus, 
Primitive Folks, p. 276, is a suggestion as to the meaning of an arrow shot. 
Among the Kohls of Chota Nagpore, an arrow is shot in front of a person as a 
sign that the way is cleared for him. 

88 The text has pi, the Q're yV; cf. also the interchange of h and ' in modern 
Arabic. 

89 See Lagarde, Prophetae Chaldaice, Lipsiae, 1872, p. xlvii, who emends: 
W nan T&ni "pIK. Cf. Duhm ad loc. 



FOOTE : THE EPHOD. 



3 7 



of Nethina of Ashkelon, to purchase stones for the ephod. 90 But 
though the ephod was restored in an altered form, it was never again 
used in divination, and only survived as a part of the insignia of 
the high priest. These insignia were known as the abundance of 
garments, D*HJO H21"l<-, which is explained as follows : " High 
priests who officiated from the day that the oil of anointment was 
lost (literally hidden) , had their high-priesthood indicated by the 
.abundance of their garments," that is, they wore the eight priestly 
garments ; of which the four peculiar to the high priest are given 
as : JtPffl TlBKl the robe, the ephod, the breastplate, 

and the gold plate. 

It is impossible to say with certainty just what this high priest's 
ephod was. Some writers, like Riehm (Handworterbuch des 
biblischen Altertums, 2d ed., 1893-4, "Ephod"), consider it essen- 
tially a shoulder-piece ; as Thenius, e.g., says the ephod is nowhere 
anything else than a shoulder garment. Others see in it a long robe 
with a girdle about the waist and the hoslien, or £ pocket,' fastened 
between the girdle and the shoulders. Xo doubt the description 
was plain enough to him who wrote it ; but the only clue we can 
have to the object described must come from a knowledge of what 
the old ephod was. This gives us three points which, in all proba- 
bility, were the traditional residuum from which the post-exilic ephod 
was reconstructed. 91 These were the pouch for the sacred lots, the 
girding about the waist, and the equivalence of ephod-bearer and 
priest. Now the main points in the description of the later ephod 
are that it is an essential part of the insignia of the high priest, the 
hoslien, a pouch for the sacred lots, which were no longer in exist- 
ence, and the woven piece for girding on. These have been brought 
out in all descriptions of the post- exilic ephod, but the point that 
has been overlooked is that the hoslien was upon the wozien piece 
(2w*n) which was used to gird it on, Ex. 28 2S , and not between the 
band and the shoulders, as has been supposed. Moreover, the loca- 
tion of the woven piece was not at the waist, but higher up, " over 

90 TlBKb C'rrS 4 D722n lMbfi WpX See Babylonian Talmud, p. 73, a, 
Commentary of Rashi. rQllfc is the participle Pual (H2*E), and properly 
denotes the high priest, not his garments; cf. Levy's Diet. rCH£; see also 
Jastrow's Diet., p. 838, b. 

91 Robertson Smith, 0. T. in the Jew. Ch., p. 219, says: " Many features of the 
old Hebrew life which are reflected in lively form in the Earlier Prophets, were 
obsolete long before the time of the Chronicler, and could not be revived except 
by archaeological research. The whole life of the old kingdom was buried and 
forgotten." 



38 JOURNAL OF BIBLICAL LITERATURE. 

the heart," Ex. 28 29f -. Hence the band must have encircled the 
body just under the armpits. The braces 92 over the shoulders, not 
needed on the old ephod, were required to keep the band in place 
when it was no longer around the loins. The " stones of remem- 
brance " are an indication of the thought of a later age and are quite 
in harmony with the fashioning of a decoration, the use of which 
had long since passed away. The expression " over Aaron's heart " 
is simply an indication of place ; the metaphorical sense of was 
mind as we still preserve it in the phrase to learn by heart. Rashi 
(Breithaupt, p. 672) says: "I have neither heard of nor found in 
the Talmud an exposition of the form of this ephod ; but I imagine 
that it was a cincture of a breadth accommodated to a man's back, 
something like an apron (succinctorium) ." There is another indi- 
cation of the location of this band. Ezek. 44 18 , giving directions as 
to the priestly garments, says : 2»T3 lUIT X 1 ?, which is said to mean 
that the band shall not be so high as to be sweated under the arms, 
nor so low as to be liable to the same at the loins. But this is 
doubtful. Yet so Rashi : " Hence they did not gird themselves in 
places liable to sweat, neither at their armpits above nor their loins 
below." Modern attempts at restoration of the post-exilic ephod 
have neglected these points. Professor Moore (Cheyne-Black's 
Encyc. Biblica, vol. ii., " Ephod ") describes it as a curious garment 
coming to the knees, apparently confusing it with the or ' robe ' 

of the ephod, Ex. 39 s , which was not a part of the ephod, but was 
put on first, and is enumerated by itself as a distinct garment (see 
above, p. 37). Braunius 93 has some curious pictures of the ephod, 
and Riehm 94 has some still more curious, but they are, of course, 
imaginary reconstructions and not intended to be taken as authentic. 

But from the data given above we shall not be far astray if we 
picture to ourselves the post-exilic ephod as a woven band, probably 
as wide as the hoshen, i.e. a span, encircling the body between the 
armpits and the loins, having jewelled braces to hold it in place, and 
a jewelled pouch in front — the traditional receptacle for the sacred 
lots. It is not hard to see in this portion of the post-exilic insignia 

92 Professor Haupt has kindly suggested to me that in the description of the 
bronze carriages for the sacrificial basins in 1 Ki. 7 30 - 40 (cf. Crit. Notes on Kings, 
SBOT. ad loc. and Stack's paper in ZAT. XXI.), fllSrO means 'struts, oblique 
braces' = 'suspenders '; see the figure of a Bedouin with fl'STlD, Psalms, in 
SBOT., p. 224. ' 

93 De Vestitu Sacerdotum Hebr., 1701. 

9i Handworterbuch des biblischen Alter turns, 1884, EpJiod. 



FOOTE : THE EPHOD. 



39 



the essential features of the ancient ephod. It cannot be termed a 
development, but rather a reconstruction based upon a tradition 
which embodied the chief characteristics of the antique ephod. 

3. CONCLUSION. 

In the light of the foregoing investigation it is apparent that many 
commentators have gone astray because they did not give due weight 
to the essential connection of the ephod with divination. — and not 
some magical, image -speaking, priest-juggling, kind of divination, 
which is utterly without proof among the Hebrews, but the ephod 
is associated with divination by lot. This is the raison d'etre of the 
old ephod, and an investigation which overlooks it is liable to any 
kind of idle conjecture. Professor Marti's error has been of this 
nature, and this is the difficulty with Professor Moore's article in 
the Encyc. Biblica, although some of the inferences are no doubt 
correct and were published by the present writer in the JHU Cir- 
culars^ over eight months before that article appeared. 

That the ephod was originally an idol and afterwards became 
something to hold lots, is, again, opposed to the sound ethnological 
principle stated by Robertson Smith that nothing is more foreign to 
traditional rites than the arbitrary introduction of new forms. Any 
custom that is based on a superstition cannot change, because the 
essential cannot be distinguished from the non-essential. This is 
clearly seen in the superstitious rites of the Romans, and especially in 
magical incantations and the rites of the SaluV 3 Quintilian, I. 6, 40, 
says : Saliorum carmina vix sacerdotibus snis satis intellecta : 97 sed 
ilia imitari vetat religio et consecratis utendum est. But divination 
by lot was a superstition. The ephod. it is evident, goes back to 
times that cannot long have been distinguishable from pure heathen- 
dom. The lots used with the ephod were not common pebbles, but 
traditional and sacred lots, whether teraphim or Urim and Thummim. 
Correctness of ritual is the more important as the rites are less 
understood. Hence Micah's joy at having a Levite for a priest : 
•'•'Now I know that Yahweh will do me good, since I have gotten a 

95 This statement is made, of course, in my own defence. The paper referred 
to, antedating the appearance of the Encyc. Biblica, does not note that the arti- 
cle on Dress by Abrahams and Cook suggests the possibility of the ephod's being 
originally a loincloth. 

96 See Teuffel and Schwabe, History of Roman Lit., 1 891, concerning the Salii. 

97 How true of our own Authorized Version ! and the following too. 



4Q 



JOURNAL OF BIBLICAL LITERATURE. 



Levite as my priest." 9S The same devotion to the minutest detail 
of ritual is to be noted in the Ceremoniale of the Roman Church. 
And so with the ephod, unless the proper lots were had, no oracle 
could be obtained ; cf. Ezra 2 G3 , and see above, p. 33. The very 
manner of drawing lots was of prime importance ; cf. Gemarah on 
Yoma, 4 1 (see above, p. 24). How, then, can we suppose that the 
ephod was at one time an idol, and in less than two hundred years 
after it was something to hold lots girded on little Samuel's waist ! 
Yet Maybaum" asserts that Micah's ephod was an idol (^DB) and 
later on was called h^V, a 'calf ! It has been suggested that the 
ephod must have been connected with idolatry, because in several 
passages the word ephod seems to have been purposely eliminated 
from the narrative. 100 Budde, in his commentary on Judges, 1897, 
p. 68, says that the old ephod must somehow have represented the 
deity and therefore was afterwards repudiated. But if any such 
intentional corrupting of passages took place, it must have been 
accomplished shortly before the Captivity, since, with the exception 
of Wellhausen, 101 commentators agree that Hosea allows the ephod 
and teraphim as " necessary forms and instruments of the worship of 
Jehovah," to use the words of Robertson Smith, and hence the ephod 
could not have been an idol. As for post-exilic times it makes little 
difference what it was, for it had evidently been forgotten ; and yet 
one cannot help feeling that, had it been an idol or any object of 
worship, it would not have been restored ; 102 but, like the teraphim, 
which represented a comparatively harmless superstition, would have 
been allowed to remain in oblivion. There is, however, another 
reason for the corruption of the passages referring to the ephod 

98 : pob 'b m ^ *b mrr ^ tut hdb nsrn what a 

confession, by the way, that the Aaronic priesthood was not known ! See 
Robertson Smith, O.T. in Jew. Ch., 1881, p. 227 f. 
99 Prophetenthum, 1883, p. 27. 

wo Cf. 1 Sa. 14 18 14 41 28 6 28" LXX, variant; I Ki. 2^; also according to 
Wellhausen, in Ezek. 44 18 , and I Sa. 15 23 , where jlK he thinks was 

101 Kleinen Propheten, p. 103, 1897. ^ * s not without a touch of scorn that 
Hosea here enumerates without explicit condemnation Masseba, Ephod, and 
Teraphim, as something one will hardly get along without in exile : this is neces- 
sary, you know, you surely like it this way ! 

102 The survival among Christian people of heathen rites which have lost their 
ancient significance, such as, e.g., the Yule-log, is not parallel; inasmuch as a 
century of disuse and oblivion would have done away with anything as a survival. 
The later ephod was not a survival, but a reconstruction; while the earlier ephod 
probably represents a survival. 



FOOTE : THE EPHOD. 



41 



which will be mentioned presently when the ephod is considered as 
a survival. 

Having considered all the passages that throw any light on the 
ephod, and also the conjectures which seem to have most weight 
and are most recent, it remains to sum up the conclusions arrived 
at. Starting with the principle that what a thing is for is the truest 
indication of what it is, we find that the ephod was evidently used 
in divination by lot. An investigation of the use of lots reveals the 
fact that they were said to be cast, but were in reality drawn ; and 
the ephod was the receptacle, KXrjpojrpis, that held them. Taken in 
connection with the passages that speak of the ephod being girded 
on or fastened about the waist (1311 having this special meaning), 
and the passage in 2 Sa. 6 14ff ', which shows what a scanty covering 
it was, the ephod appears to have been a pouch, large enough to 
put the hands into, which was hung at the waist of the person using 
it. It was easily carried in the hand. Its early use was not confined 
to any special order of - priests ; 103 but, like other things originally 
common to all, it gradually became a priestly function. Samuel as 
a lad, girt with the ephod at Shiloh, is a remarkable parallel to the 
child that drew the oracles of Fortuna at Prseneste. The ephod was 
quickly consulted, though there was doubtless a technical method 
which was always observed. The lots were probably teraphim in 
the earlier times, but Urim and Thummim seem to be supplanting 
them at least as early as the time of Saul, though they continued to 
be associated with the ephod as late as Hosea, 740 B.C. There is 
no reason for supposing that Micah's ephod was anything different 
from that used by Saul and David. In regard to Gideon's ephod, 
when we omit the later editorial comment, there is the bare state- 
ment that it was made and placed in the city of Ophra. From this 
statement no theory which conforms to what is known of the ephod 
can be disproved. The strongest probability lies on the side of its 
being what the ephod was later — a pouch for the sacred lots, made, 
it may be, most sumptuously (compare the candles, etc., given to 
churches), as befitted the maker's social position (as, e.g., Gideon's), 
and used as Micah's ephod was, in a private chapel such as wealthy 
citizens affected. It is best to leave it so. Coniectura vilis est. 

Connected with the subject of the ephod is the consideration of 

103 But Wellhausen, Proleg., 2d ed., 1883, p. 137, states that only priests could 
use the ephod. What shall we say, then, of Micah's Levite, of Samuel, or Saul, or 
David? See also Robertson Smith, O.T. in Jew. Ch., 18S1, p. 248; an 1 May- 
baum, Prophetenthum, 1883, p. 10. 



42 



JOURNAL OF BIBLICAL LITERATURE. 



it as a survival of a primitive usage for ceremonial purposes just as 
the use of stone knives for circumcision, or the Shofar in the modern 
synagogue, the use of candles instead of gas or electric lights at 
dinner parties, or the costume of the yeomen of the guard in Eng- 
land who are still habited in the costume of the sixteenth century, or 
the academic gowns, the royal crowns and sceptres, or the vest- 
ments 104 of the Catholic Church, etc. ; cf. Joshua in the Polychrome 
Bible, p. 62, 1. 5. In the |W sackcloth is a survival of primitive 
usage ; cf. Gen. 42 25 the corn sack, Is. 20 2 dress of prophets and 
devotees, Gen. 37 s4 conventional mourning garb. If the priests put 
on the ephod, they did so because the ephod was a primitive usage. 
It has been seen that no distinction is made in the O.T. between 
ephodh and ephodh badh, which has been supposed to mean linen 
ephod. But from the consideration on p. 3 above, note 7, and the 
extended examination in Note D, p. 47, below, we must understand 



ephodh badh to be a covering of the nakedness, literally ephodh partis 
(virilis). Such representations are to be seen on Egyptian and 
Babylonian monuments. Perhaps the commonest shape of the 
ancient loincloth is shown in Fig. 1, which certainly meets the re- 
quirements of the description of the mikhnese badh. The loincloth 
of the Indians of Cape Horn (see above, p. 12, n. 33) was triangular 
in shape and kept in place by a cord, as in Fig. 2. The ephodh badh, 
however, considering the use to which it is put, may have developed 
from something like Fig. 3. This is a pouch or bag, differentiated 
from the kilt by its specialized use. For the ephod was not a mere 
loincloth or covering of the nakedness. The mikhnese badh were 
that, and became the sacred garment. The ephod was not a loin- 
cloth per se, but a pouch for sacred lots existing side by side with 
ordinary loincloths and sacred kilts. Moreover, the mikhnese badh, 
or sacred kilt, does not appear to have excited any repugnance at a 

104 It may be noted that the vestments of the Church, especially the Chasuble, 
Alb, and Stole, are probably the ancient official garments of civil magistrates of 
the early centuries of the Christian era, and rather of Syrian officials than of 
Greek or Roman. See the Century Dictionary, 1900, Vol. VIII., p. 6741. 





Fig. 1. 



Fig. 2. 



Fig. 3. 



FOOTE : THE EPHOD. 



43 



period of greater refinement than that of the early monarchy. That 
this was the case with the ephod seems, to most commentators, 
proved by the apparently intentional corruption of some of the 
passages referring to the ephod (see above, p. 40, n. 100). These 
commentators explain this repudiation by supposing the ephod to 
have been an idol. But this was not the case. Perhaps the reason 
for the repudiation of the ephod by certain redactors of the Biblical 
documents may have been that they considered it indecent, either 
because it was too scanty for a loincloth, or perhaps, because it had 
some connection with the phallic worship of the Canaanites. The 
ephod was not a phallus, which, we have constantly to remind our- 
selves, was daily seen by the ancients without the slightest offence 
(see Dr. Dollinger's Heidenthum unci Judenthum, p. 169) ; but badh 
may have meant phallus, and ephod was closely connected with it, 
sharing the sacredness of the symbol, which to the ancients suggested 
only profound and reverent thoughts. This cannot be doubted from 
such references as Gen. 2\~ 47 29 , 105 where a vow was rendered the 
more inviolable by contact with what was looked upon as the symbol 
of the mystery of life. Some such connection as this may account 
for a feeling in later times that the ephod was indecent. 

Ethnological Parallels. 

The ephod seems to be a special development of the primitive 
loincloth. The loin-covering was probably the starting-point of 
development in the direction both of the garment and the pouch. 
A step in this development is seen in an account by John Foreman, 106 
who travelled for several years in and about all the principal islands 
of the Philippine Archipelago, and who proceeded to Paris, in Octo- 
ber, 1898, at the request of the American Peace Commission, to 
express his views before them. In 1696, he says, the men of the 
Pelew Islands had a leaf- fibre garment around their loins, and to it 
was attached a piece of stuff in front, which was thrown over their 
shoulders and hung loose at the back. This loincloth, which cannot 
but remind one of the fig-leaf hagdrdth of our first parents (Gen. 3 7 ), 
would evidently furnish a place where articles could be carried. But 
the ephod was not an ordinary pouch used for general purposes, 
but it had a distinctly sacred character. The post-exilic ephod still 

105 Cf. Dillmann's Genesis, Leipzig, 6th ed., 1892, p. 301 ; also Gunkel's 
Genesis, p. 232. 

106 The Philippine Islands, 2d ed., London, 1899, p. 39. 



44 



JOURNAL OF BIBLICAL LITERATURE. 



retained its sacred character, being a part of the merubah begddim 
(see above, p. 37, n. 90) by which the high priest was distinguished. 

This use of garments to denote dignity is not without parallel. 
Herbert Spencer in Ceremonial Institutions, "Badges and Costumes," 
1880, p. 181, quotes Cook as saying of the Sandwich Islanders, that 
quantity of clothing is a mark of position, and of the Tongans he 
says the same ; while he tells us that in Tahiti, the higher classes 
signify their rank by wearing a large amount of clothing at great 
inconvenience to themselves. The Arabs furnish an allied fact. In 
Karseem " it is the fashion to multiply this important article of 
raiment [shirt] by putting on a second over the first and a third 
over the second." The same practice prevails in Altenburg, Ger- 
many, where the peasant girls wear a great many skirts. 107 The 
ephod came, in time, to be the symbol of a special class of men who 
were, in a way, intermediary between man and God, for through 
them divine oracles were obtained. A sacred band for the loins may 
be the index of this divine mission. Frazer's Golden Bough, 1890, 
Vol. I., p. 37, gives instances of kings in the South Sea Islands who 
were regarded as divine persons and were consulted as an oracle. 
He says : " At his inauguration the king of Tahiti received a sacred 
girdle 108 of red and yellow feathers, which not only raised him to 
the highest earthly station, but identified him with their gods." But 
a still closer parallel to the ephod is to be found among the Colorado 
Cliff-dwellers, who used a sacred girdle of cotton cloth, which, like 
the later ephod, was about a span wide, and served as a pocket for 
the prayer meal and sacred amulets (see above, p. 34) used in cere- 
monials. 109 We do not know that the amulets were used as lots, but 
if so, here would be a primitive ephod with amulet-lots and distinctly 
sacred character. No doubt many ethnological parallels will come 
to light when the true idea of the ephod and divination by lot are 
borne in mind ; but there can be no reasonable doubt that it reaches 
back in its origin to most primitive times. 

Etymology of the Term "Ephod." 

No etymology yet proposed for the word T1£X has been generally 
accepted. The various forms of the stem which occur, are : TIES, 

107 Cf. the plate " Volkstrachten, I., No. 20," in Meyer's Konversations-Lexikon. 

108 Cf. Huxley, Science and Hebrew Tradition, New York, 1894, p. 332. 

109 Such a sacred girdle as is here described may be seen among the ethno- 
logical exhibits of the University of Pennsylvania. 



FOOTE : THE EPHOD. 



45 



"IS**, nnSSt, ^R\> ^SK, lt used t0 be definitely stated 

that ^SX meant ' to gird or bind on,' and USX was the ' thing girded 
on,' and m£X the ' girding on.' One difficulty with this etymology 
was the lack of Semitic parallels for HEX with such a meaning, which 
is gained entirely from the context ; but the chief difficulty is that 
critical research has shown that was in use several centuries 

earlier than HEN and PHBK, whence arose the later opinion that *!EK 
is denominative and PHSK a derivative. Another group of commen- 
tators following Lagarde (Ubersicht, p. 178 ; Mittheil. 4, pp. 17, 146) 
refer T£K to Arab, wafada \ to come as an ambassador,' and finally 
a ' garment of approach to God.' This is just as fanciful as Lagarde's 
etymology of b$ and JUXn. The ephod is not to be regarded as a 
garment. Other commentators and scholars have based a theory on 
the use of ITTSX 110 in Is. 30 22 (see above, p. 16 f., for a consideration 
of this passage) that means a ' covering, garment, mask,' but 

this verse may be as late as the second century B.C., and a careful 
study of the parallelism would favor some such idea as i ornament ' 
for rnSK, which may be derived from the ornamental post-exilic 
ephod. The form !"HENI is the regular fern, of TlSX for Tl£X, cf. 
CHS, mi* ; b'M, rhlj ; especially DTO f. Plfc^JJ and the by-form 
Dl*Vp. For the initial e, cf. DIDX, Ges.-Kautzsch, §§ 23, h ; 84 a, q, 
and Haupt, Assyr. E-vowel, p. 26, No. 10. The Syriac equivalent of 
T.£tf has the fem. form, KrHS with aphseresis of the initial N ; see 
Noldeke, Syriac Gram. §'32 (cf. K^HII end for TO). A 
tentative explanation of ^llSX has been given recently by Hubert 
Grimme in the Orient. Litt.-Zeitung, February, 1901, under the title, 
btf^K und Stammverwandtes, who notes the phenomenon seen in 
the Semitic languages of p showing a tendency to become K. He 
believes that there are two ^'s, a sonant q which is stable, and a surd 
q which has a tendency to become K. m He gives several examples, 
and among these are HSp 'wrap together," appearing as 1£K 'wrap 
up,' and *nBX ' zusammenziehbare Loostasche? This is, at least, the 
meaning sought, but the etymology is not certain. 

110 Cf. the Talmudic and It is by no means necessary to 
suppose that is derived from Latin fiinda. Funda (Macr. Saturn. 2, 4, 31) 
may be a Semitic loan word. 

111 Cf. Haupt, in Zeitschrift fi'ir Assyriologie, vol. ii (Leipzig, 1887), p. 270, n. 2; 
Allen in PA OS., October, 1888, p. cxi; Talcott Williams' article on the Arabic 
dialect of Morocco, in Beitr'dge zur Assyr., Vol. III., p. 569, 1. 26. Professor 
Haupt considers Grimme's theory very uncertain. 



46 



JOURNAL OF BIBLICAL LITERATURE. 



NOTES. 

A. According to Skeat's Etymological Dictionary of the Eng. Lang., Oxford, 
1882, the verb kilt, to tuck up, is derived from a substantive signifying lap, occur- 
ring in Swed. dial, kilta, the lap; cf. the Icelandic Kjalta, the lap, kjoltu-barn, a 
baby in the lap. The oldest form of the substantive occurs in Mceso-Goth. kilthei, 
the womb, from the same root as Eng. child. Thus the original sense of kilt as 
a substantive is 'lap,' hence 'tucked-up clothes.' 

B. Braunius, De vestitu sacerdotum Hebr., I. 9 : Docet etiam doctissimus Hot- 
tingerus in Hist. Orient, de Religione veterum Arabian, I. 8, " Koreischitas ante 
Islamismum sacra sua celebrasse nudos, atque ita aedem Meccanam circuivisse." 
See also Robertson Smith, Religion of the Semites? pp. 161, 450 f., where he 
remarks : At Mecca, in the times of heathenism, the sacred circuit of the Caaba 
was made by the Bedouins, either naked or in clothes borrowed from one of 
the Hojjis, or religious community of the sacred city. Wellhausen has shown that 
this usage was not peculiar to Mecca, for at the sanctuary of Al-Jalsad also it 
was customary for the sacrificer to borrow a suit from the priest; and the same 
custom appears in the worship of the Tyrian Baal (2 Ki. io' 22 ), to which- it may 
be added that, in 2 Sa. 6 14 , David wears the priestly ephod at the festival of the 
in-bringing of the Ark. He had put off his usual clothes, for Michal calls his 
conduct a shameless exposure of his person (cf. above, p. 7) ; see also I Sa. 19' 24 . 
The Meccan custom is explained by saying that they would not perform the 
sacred rite in garments stained with sin, but the real reason is quite different. 
It appears that sometimes a man did make the circuit in his own clothes, but in 
that case he could neither wear them again nor sell them, but had to leave them 
at the gate of the sanctuary (AzracI, p. 125; B. Hisham, p. 128 f.). They 
became taboo (harTm, as the verse cited by Ibn Hisham has it) through contact 
with the holy place and function. See further in Robertson Smith; and cf. 
Jastrow in J AOS., XX., p. 144, also XXL, 1900, p. 23, The Tearing of Garments. 

C. The primitive use of p*n is clearly seen from the following analysis, to be 
associated with the sexual relation, as Professor Haupt has suggested. The uses 
of P'n are here classified in five groups which are arranged chronologically 
according to the earliest passages quoted in each group. 

1. The primitive use of p*n, as seen in the earliest passages, clearly refers to 
sexual embrace; as, Gen. 16 5 , "I gave my handmaid into thy embrace." So 
2 Sa. 12 8 I Ki. I' 2 (contemp.?) Prov. 5 21 Mic. 7 5 ; and probably Deut. 13 7 28 54 - 56 . 

2. Another primitive use of p'n is seen in the place where a child is held. 
If at the breast, the Hebrews used: "H, H'n, it', and Tu. If on the 
shoulder, see Is. 46". Undoubtedly the reference is to the abdominal part 
of the body and the lap (cf. note A on kilt, above). So Xu. II 12 Ruth 4 16 
2 Sa. 12 3 (nearly contemp.) 1 Ki. 3 20 17 19 Is. 40 11 Lam. 2 12 . Note that our use 
of bosom in these places is poetic and symbolical; cf. above, p. 23. 

3. The use is. then seen to be extended to the garment about the p'n, the lap, 
the folds of a garment overhanging the girdle — the primitive pocket or place for 
putting the hand. So Ex. 4 6 - ' (in J, 850 B.C.) Ps. 35 13 74 11 79 1 ' 2 89 50 Prov. 6 27 
l6 33 I? 23 2l u is. 656 ' Jer. 32 18 . 



FOOTE : THE EPHOD. 



47 



4. Then the word is used of a curved surface, showing a similarity of develop- 
ment with sinus and koXttos. So I Ki. 22 35 (600 B.C.?) Ezek. 43 13 - 17 . 

5. Among the latest uses of the word are Job 19 27 , referring to the abdominal 
cavity, and Eccles. 7°, referring to the same figuratively as seat of affections. 

With the use of p"n compare Assyr. utlu and statu; e.g. Descent of Istar, 
• Obv. 35, "the slaves sa istu utli hairisina who from their husbands' embrace . . ." 

And II R 35, Nr. 4, " a maid sa ina sun mutisa who in her husband's embrace . . ." 

D. On p. 3 above, it is maintained that ID never means ' linen ' but always 
' part.' All the decisive passages are here discussed. Ex. 39 28 makes it plain 
that ID does not refer to the material of the D'D3Dtt. The LXX and Pesh. feel 
the difficulty and omit ID. We revert then to the original meaning 'part.' Con- 
sidering Ex. 2S 42 in this light, TD JTlDDb ITH1? and the following clause are 
plainly explanatory of ID and may be glosses. In Lev. 6 3 " even the miknese 
badh shall he put over his flesh " seems to be a gloss on ID "HE, which with 
the Samar. and Targum is better read ID h 1fr, vestimenta partis {virilis'). In 
Lev. 6 14 ID between M3riD and ttflp may have been added later when ID was 
misunderstood to mean linen; ID after n£32»ft is also a subsequent addition; 
after ''DDDft and I22DK it is probably original. Note that the 1D1 *HJD are worn 
in the sanctuary only {i.e. in P). In Lev. 16 23 ID is original, while in v. 32 "HJQ 
tfflpn seems to be an explanatory gloss, as also in v. 4 . In 1 Sa. 2 18 22 18 2 Sa. 6 14 
I Chr. 15 27 ID TBX, already sufficiently discussed, affords no reason for inventing 
a new meaning for ID ; these passages are amply satisfied with the original 
meaning 'part.' In Ezek. g' 2 - 3 - 11 io' 2 - 6 - 7 Dan. io 5 12 6 7 D^ID.I t£D"?, associated 
with Q"±1?2, apparently refers to a loin cloth, D'lD for ID as partes privatae for 
pars virilis. The supernatural being in Ezek. 9 and 10 may have had on an 
ID 11EK around V3riZ3 with an inkhorn stuck in the belt of the 11SN. This 
argument becomes more cogent when it is seen that the Versions do not under- 
stand ID. In the earlier passages: I Sa. 2 18 the LXX simply transliterates; in 
22 18 Xivov in Cod. Alex, is evidently a subsequent correction; and in 2 Sa. 6 14 
€^a\\ov is clearly a guess. Some of the later passages show that ID was supposed 
by some translators to mean 'linen.' In I Chr. 15 27 the Chronicler (see above, 
p. 11) apparently substituted another phrase for ID USX 11"! bin. which was 
added later under the influence of the parallel passage. But if we find ' linen' in 
the LXX in 1 Chr. 15 27 as well as in the Priestly Code; consistently throughout 
the Vulgate; and in the Peshita everywhere except in Dan. io 5 12 6 ", neverthe- 
less in Ezek. 9- 3 - 11 the LXX renders D"1D by 6 irodr)pr)s, and similarly T-Cp 
1S1D1 was not understood. Moreover Theodotion, who must have known the 
hypothetical ' linen,' discards it entirely and resorts to a transliteration, while the 
Pesh. sometimes hazards 1p"X. From the Versions, then, it is plain that 'linen' 
is simply a guess for ID and is varied without scruple; cf. D'lDI in 
Ezek. 9 11 IO 2 - 6 variously rendered evSeSvKihs rbv Trodrjp-q, — rrju crToXrjv. — rrjv 
<tto\7}v tV ay Lav; contrast Exek. 44 17 - 18 , Heb. and Versions. We may then 
conclude that ID ' linen ' never existed, and ID in ID 112N, ID a C;D£, ID "13D 
means pars {virilis) and D^ID in D'HDI t£pb is an accusative of the member, as 
in Jud. i 7 , cf. Ges.-Kautzsch § 121 a 7 , and means partes {privatas), or as Haupt 
has suggested, D'HD means a covering of the ID like x €l pk> ntanica, irodeiov, etc. 



BIBLIOGRAPHY. 



Alizon, F. La Mantique chez les Hebreux. Montaubon, 1900. 

Allen, Grant. Evolution of the Idea of God. New York, 1897, P- 182 f - 

Augustine, St. The City of God. Edition of Marcus Dods. Edinburgh, 
1872, II. p. 33. 

Baudissin, W. Studien zur semitischen Religionsgeschichte. Leipzig, 1876, 
I- P- 57- 

Geschichte des alttestamentlichen Priestertums. Leipzig, 
1889, p. 205 ff. 

Benzinger, J. Hebraische Archaologie. Freiburg und Leipzig, 1894, 

pp. 382 f., 408. 

Bertheau, E. Das Buch der Richter und Ruth. Leipzig, 2 A. 1883, P- 162 ft 

Brinton, D. G. Religions of Primitive Peoples. New York, 1897. 
Braunius, J. De Vestitu Sacerdotum Hebraeorum. Amsterdam, ijoiP 

I. 9; II. 6. 

Budde, K. Richter und Samuel. 1890, p. 115 f. 

Richter. Freiburg, 1897, P- 68. 
Carpzovius, J. G. De Pontificum Hebraicorum Vestitu Sacro. Lipsiae, 1748. 
Davies, T. Witton. Magic, Divination, and Demonology, Hebraica. July, 
1898. (Short paper.) 
Magic, Divination, and Demonology. London and Leipzig, 
1898. 

Cheyne-Black, Encyclopaedia Biblica, 1900-1, Divination. 
De Wette, W. Archaologie. Leipzig, 1864. 

Dillmann, A. Alttestamentliche Theologie. Leipzig, 1895, PP- I 3^> I S3- 

Exodus und Leviticus. Leipzig, 1880, p. 299 f., 3 A. von 

Ryssel, 1897, P- 33 2 
Die Genesis. Leipzig, 1875, p. 314. 
Dozy, R. Histoire des Musulmans d'Espagne. Leiden, 1847-51. 

Driver, S. R. Introduction to Literature of the Old Testament. Edin- 

burgh, 1898. 

Hastings' Dictionary of the Bible. 1900. Ephod. 
Notes on the Hebrew Text of the Books of Samuel. Oxford, 
1890. 

Duff, A. Old Testament Theology. London and Edinburgh, 1891, 

pp. 103, 148. 

Duhm, B. Das Buch Jesaia ubersetzt und erklart. Gottingen, 1892, 

p. 200. 

Eichhorn, K. F. Einleitungin das Alt e Testament. Gottingen, 1823-4. 
Foreman, John. The Philippine Islands. 2d ed. London, 1899, p. 39. 
Frazer, J. G. The Golden Bough. London, 1890, I. p. 39; 2d ed., 1900, 

3 vols. 



vi 



BIBLIOGRAPHY. 



Thesaurus Linguae Hebraicae et Chaldaicae. 1835, P- I 3S« 



I. p. 488 ff. 
Litteratur- 



Gesenius, W. 
Gesenius-Buhl. 

Gramberg. Kritische Geschichte der Religionsideen. 1829, 

Grimme, H. und Stammverwandtes (Orientalische 

Zeitung. Feb., 1901). 
Griineisen, C. Der Ahnenkultus und die Urreligion Israels. Halle, 1900, 

p. 192 ff. 

Haupt, P. Babylonian Elements in Levitical Ritual (Journal of Biblical 

Literature. 1900, I). 
Heidegger, J. H. Historia Patriarcharum. Amsterdam, 1667-71, p. 430. 
Hitzig, F. Biblische Theologie und messianische Weissagungen des 

Alten Testaments. Karlsruhe, 1880, p. 25, n. 
Holzinger, H. Exodus (Marti series). Tubingen, 1900, p. 135 f. 

Huber, Anton. Uber das "Meisir" genannte Spiel der heidnischen Araber. 

Leipzig, 1883. 

Imraulkais. Mo'allaqat. Arab, ed., Arnold, 14. Lipsiae, 1850. 

Jacobs, Jos. Studies in Biblical Archaeology. New York, 1894. 

Jastrow, Jr., M. The Tearing of Garments as a Symbol of Mourning, JAOS. 
xxi. p. 23. 

Josephus, Fl. Whiston's ed. London, 1875. 

Kautzsch, E. Textbibel (Erklarutig der Fremdworter, Ephod). Freiburg, 

Leipzig, Tubingen, 1899. 
Keil, C. F. Handbuch der biblischen Archaologie. Frankfurt und 

Erlangen, 1858. 

Kittel, R. Geschichte der Hebraer. Gotha, 1888, II. pp. 32 A., 74, 90, 

173 f., 260. 

Kitto, J. Palestine. London, 1841, p. 239. 

Cyclopedia of Biblical Literature. Edinburgh, 1870. 
Klostermann, A. Die Biicher Samuels und der Konige. 1887. 
Knobel, A. Prophetismus. Breslau, 1837. 

Kdhler, A. Lehrbuch der biblischen Geschichte des Alten Testaments. 

Erlangen, 1875-93. 

Konig, F. E. Hauptprobleme der israelitischen Religionsgeschichte. 

Leipzig, 1884, p. 59 ff. 
Lehrgebaude der Hebraischen Sprache. Leipzig, 1895, II 1 . 
139 199 a, 494 b. 

Kuenen, A. De goodsdienst van Israel. Haarlem, 1869, I. p. 102. 

Volksreligion und Weltreligion. Berlin, 1 883, p. 83, 
Rem. 3. 

Lagarde, P. de. Prophetae Chaldaice, xlvii. Leipzig, 1872. 

Ubersicht uber die Bildung der Nomina. Gottingen, 1889, 
p. 178. 

Mittheilungen, 4, pp. 17, 146; CgN. 1890, p. 15 f. Gottingen. 
Lotz, W. Realencyklopaedie fur protestantische Theologie und Kirche. 

Leipzig, 1898. Ephod. 
Maimonides, M. Yad Hachazaqah. Warsaw, 1 181-82. 

Maybaum, S. Die Entwickelung des altisraelitischen Prophetenthums. 

Berlin, 1883, p. 25 ff. 



BIBLIOGRAPHY. 



Vll 



(The International 

1 900- 1. Ephod. 
(Hibbert Lectures). 



Marti, K. Die Geschichte der israelitischen Religion. Strassburg, 

1897, PP- 2 9> 5°' 101 • 
M'ClintOCk and Strong. Encyclopaedia of Biblical Literature. New York, 

1867-81. Ephod, Teraphim. 
Meyer, J. Chronicon Hebraeorum. Amsterdam, 1699, pp. 407, 468, 475. 

Michaelis, J. D. Commentationes. Bremen, 1763. de Teraphis, 

Supplementa. 1792, p. 109. 
Montefiore, C. G. Religion of the Ancient Hebrews (Hibbert Lectures). 

London, 1892, p. 43. 
Moore, G. F. Judges. New York, 1895, P- 381 f. 

Critical Commentary.) 
Cheyne-Black, Encyclopaedia Biblica. 
Miiller, F. Max. Origin and Growth of Religion 

London, 1879, p. 57. 
Muss-Arnolt, W. Urim and Thummim (Amer. Jour, of Semitic Languages and 

Literature). Chicago, July, 1900. 
Nowack, W. Archaologie. Freiburg und Leipzig, 1894, II. p. 21 f. 

Der Prophet Hosea. Berlin, 1880, p. 45 f. 
Richter und Ruth. Gottingen, 1900, pp. 81, 143 f. 
Ottley, R. L. Aspects of the Old Testament (Bampton Lectures). London, 

1897, P- 113- 

Olshausen, J. Lehrbuch der hebraischen Sprache. Braunschweig, 1S61, 

P- 332. 

Perceval, Caussin de. Essais sur l'histoire des Arabs. 1847, 3 IG - 

Rashi. Commentary on the Pentateuch (Latin translation by Breit- 

haupt). Gotha, 17 10, p. 672. 
Reuss, Ed. Die Geschichte der Heiligen Schriften Alten Testaments. 

Braunschweig, i88r, §§ 102, 139. 
Riehm, Ed. Handworterbuch des biblischen Altertums. Bielfeld u. 

Leipzig, 1884. Ephod. 2d ed. 1893-4. 
Robertson, J. Early Religion of Israel. Edinburgh and London, 1892, 

pp. 229 ff., 239, 450, note. 
Schultz, H. Alttestamentliche Theologie. Gottingen, 1889, pp. 135, 192, 

257; 5 A, 1896, p. 101. 
Schwally, F. Das Leben nach dem Tode. Giessen, 1892, p. 35. 

Sellin, E. Beitrage zur israelitischen und jiidischen Religionsgeschichte. 

Leipzig, 1897, II- P- 1I 5 
Smend, R. Alttestamentliche Religionsgeschichte. 2 A. Freiburg, 

1893, pp. 41 f., 57, 130 ff. 1899. 
Smith, H. Preserved. Samuel (International Critical Commentary). New- 
York, 1899, pp. 208, 295. 
Smith, W. Dictionary of the Bible. 2d ed. 1894. Ephod. 

Smith, W. Robertson. Old Testament in the Jewish Church. Edinburgh, 

1881, pp. 220, 227, 230,259, 264, 428; 2d ed. 1892. 
Prophets of Israel. Edinburgh, 1882, p. 98. 
Religion of the Semites. London, 1894, pp. 161, 451. 
Spencer. De Legibus Hebraeorum ritualibus earumque rationibus. 

Tubingae, 1732, III. 3. 



viii 



BIBLIOGRAPHY. 



Spencer, Herbert. Ceremonial Institutions. New York, 1880, p. 1S1. 

Stade. B. Lehrbuch der hebraischen Grammatik. Berlin, 1887 (1879, 

§§ 103 A 208 c). 
Studer, G. L. Das Buch der Richter. 1835. 2 A > l8 4 2 - 

Thenius, 0. Exegetisches Handbuch, Samuel. Leipzig, 1S64. 

Thenius-L6hr. Die Biicher Samuels. Leipzig, 1S98, p. 60. 
Van Hoonacker, A. Le Sacerdoce Levitique. 1899, P- 37 
Vatke. W. Biblische Theologie. Berlin, 1S35, VoL I. p. 267 ff. 

Wellhausen, J. Prolegomena zur Geschichte Israels. Berlin, 1883, p. 131; 

4 A. p. 127. 
Die Kleinen Propheten. Berlin, 1892. 
Skizzen III. Berlin, 1897, pp. 127, 167. 
Whitehouse, 0. C. Hastings' Dictionary of the Bible. New York, Edinburgh, 

1 900-1. Lots. 

Winer, G. B. Biblisches Realworterbuch. Leipzig, 3 A. 1847-8. 

Zeller, P. Biblisches Handworterbuch. Calw and Stuttgart, 1885. 

Ephod, Teraphim. 



ABBREVIATIONS AND DATES. 

J = Judaic document, prior to 800 B.C. 
E 1 = Ephraimitic " " " 750 B.C. 
E 2 = " " " " 650 B.C. 
D = Deuteronomistic editor, about 6th century B.C. 

R D = " expansion of the combined documents J and E (called 

JE), about 6th century B.C. 
P = Priestly code, later than 550 B.C. 

LXX = The Greek Bible, called the Septuagint, not earlier than 300 B.C. 
A = Aquila 1 

2 = Symmachus \ Greek versions, 2d century A.D. 
0 = Theodotion J 

Pesh. = Peshitta, a Syriac version by Christians of the 2d century. 

V =3 Latin Bible, called the Vulgate, not earlier than the 5th century A.D. 

O.L. = Fragments of an older Latin version, called the Itala. 



VITA. 



Born at Dobbsferry. on the Hudson. July 26. 1857, 1 moved to Cleveland, 
Ohio, in 1868. and studied in the public schools of that city, serving for 
a year as assistant in the Public Library. In 1876 I matriculated at 
Racine College, Wisconsin, where I served as organist during my college 
course. In 1880 I graduated as salutatorian, receiving the degree of 
Bachelor of Arts with honors in Latin. I taught English and Latin for 
a year in Racine Grammar School. In 1881 I entered the General 
Theological Seminary in New York City. In 1882 I received the degree 
of Master of Arts from Racine College, and in 1884 the degree of Bachelor 
of Divinity from the General Seminary. I was ordered Deacon in 1884 by 
the Bishop of Chicago, and advanced to the priesthood in 1885 by the 
Bishop of Tennessee. From 1889-98 I took up parochial work in Cleve- 
land. Ohio, devoting a portion of my time to teaching, privately, and in the 
Young Men's Christian Association College. In 1898 I came to the Johns 
Hopkins University, where I devoted special attention to Semitic and 
Classical studies, attending courses given by Professors Haupt, Johnston, 
Gildersleeve. Warren, Smith, and others. 



r 



i 




j 



Deacidified using the Bookkeeper process. 
Neutralizing agent: Magnesium Oxide 
Treatment Date: Feb. 2005 

PreservationTechnologies 

A WORLD LEADER IN PAPER PRESERVATION 

1 1 1 Thomson Park Drive 
Cranberry Township, PA 1 6066 
(724) 779-2111 



OF CONGRESS 

Hi- 



